Developing the adjudicated case study method

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

280 Downloads (Pure)


In this commentary we discuss Miller’s Panel of Psychological Inquiry (PPI) and Bohart’s Research Jury method approaches to the development of the adjudicated case study method, as represented by the papers assembled for this issue of Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy. In our view, the case studies presented here demonstrate the rapidly developing potential offered by this approach for psychotherapy research and reveal many parallels to recent research using the Hermeneutic Single Case Efficacy Design (HSCED) model. In our view, each of the three models has taken significant steps forward in adapting particular aspects of the legal process as viable psychotherapy research procedures. In this commentary we summarize the HSCED method, then take readers through the issues of the sources of the evidence used; ways in which that evidence is tested; claims, burden and standard of proof; and the handling of the adjudication process itself. We conclude with recommendations for further development of adjudicated case study methods.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)230-241
Number of pages12
JournalPragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2011


  • adjudicated case study method
  • panel of psychological inquiry
  • research jury method
  • hermeneutic single-case efficacy design
  • psychotherapy research
  • evidence
  • burden of proof
  • cross-examination
  • case studies
  • clinical case studies


Dive into the research topics of 'Developing the adjudicated case study method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this