We review the literature on clinical judgment and statistical/actuarial prediction both in clinical psychology and in neuropsychology and we attempt to place these findings within the broader context of judgment theory. Current research on judgment in neuropsychology is consistent with research in other areas that documents the limitations of humans as judges and argues for increased utilization of actuarial methods and decision aids. In addition, there are virtually no data suggesting judgmental accuracy is related to experience, acknowledged expertise, or confidence in the accuracy of one's predictions. We attempt to identify judgment practices which contribute to diagnostic error in neuropsychology and we make recommendations that neuropsychologists can use to increase their judgmental accuracy. Research priorities in this area are discussed.