Clinical judgment is foundational to psychological practice. Accurate judgment forms the basis for establishing reasonable goals and selecting appropriate treatments, which in turn are essential in achieving positive therapeutic outcomes. Therefore, Spengler and colleagues' meta-analytic finding--clinical judgment accuracy improves marginally with traditional education, training, and clinical experience--is disconcerting and should serve as a wake-up call. Now is the time to move with urgency. The authors urge the development of a comprehensive, standardized, and scientifically based metatheory to inform clinical judgment. A metatheory should describe the content of clinical judgment, the process of clinical judgment, and the self-reflection of clinicians. Without employment of such a metatheory and concomitant improvement in clinicians' judgment, professional psychologists are on soft footing in extolling their claim as scientist-practitioners and ethical professionals.