Equivalence to normal?

Frederick L. Newman, Stephen Saunders, Daniel J. Feaster

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


The two articles discussed are integral ingredients of a greater whole Ken Howard envisioned. The first (Saunders, Howard, & Newman, 1988) refined our understanding of clinical significance, challenging researchers to clearly define the character and range of behaviors identified as normal or non-clinical for a specific population. The second (Rogers, Howard, & Vessey, 1993) focused on tests of equivalency between two experimental groups. Both were part of a general theme: A study's outcome requires a careful delineation of the norms and "normality" for that population as well as to whether the differences or equivalencies of the outcomes from these norms are important to the client, to the client's family, or to the community/society in which the client is to function. Ken's second authorship, typical on his many publications, honored his dedication to mentoring those who would improve upon what is currently understood.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)735-743
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Clinical Psychology
Issue number7
StatePublished - Jul 1 2003
Externally publishedYes


  • Abnormality
  • Clinical significance
  • Confidence interval
  • Equivalency
  • Normality
  • Psychotherapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Clinical Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Equivalence to normal?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this