| The purpose of the current study was to examine the cognitive processing of novice and expert Guardian ad Litem (GAL) volunteers as they investigate case information and make decisions. The participant group consisted of seven novice and seven expert GALs. Nine hypotheses were tested and incorporated the following methods: (1) verbal protocol analyses, (2) an explicit information search, (3) a retrospective retrieval task, and (4) various ranking and rating exercises.; The results suggest that both similarities and differences exist between how novice and expert GALs process case information. The experts were observed to be more consistent in their initial approach to an information board created for this study than were the novices, but beyond the first 10 moves, no significant differences were found. In terms of coded verbalizations, novices elicited significantly (p < .10) more Executive Functions and Assimilation thought units than did the experts. A contingency analysis revealed that verbalizations coded as Effortful Processing contributed most to the proportion for experts. The novices recalled significantly more child and environmental cards categorized by field, and potentiating and compensatory cards categorized by valence. No significant differences (p > .10) were found between experts and novices on cards recalled and categorized by resource. In terms of the decision events, experts were more consistent and more conservative with their placement decision than were the novices; however, the novices were significantly more confident (p < .10) with their decision than the experts. In terms of treatment recommendations, experts' "number one" treatment option reflected long-term solutions compared to the novices whose recommendations concentrated on symptom relief. No significant differences (p > .10) were found between expert and novice GALs on their confidence in their "number one" treatment recommendation; nor were differences found between groups on the importance of case factors to either decision event. Experts and novices were found, however, to rate parent and child factors as more important to their respective decisions than environmental factors. Strengths and limitations of the study and implications for GAL training and future research were also presented. |
