In many domains evidence exists that expertise development goes along
with the adaptation of cognitive structures and processes. Whilst it is
generally assumed that expertise and its acquisition is domain-specific,
there are nevertheless similarities across domains that may evoke
comparable processes and lead to similar cognitive restructuring. The
“Knowledge Restructuring through Case Processing” (KR-CP) theory is
proposed as a domain-general framework that takes into account
similarities and differences between domains in order to explain
corresponding processes and performances of professionals in different
domains. The KR-CP theory is based on the assumption that dealing with
complex cases plays a major role in many professional domains and allows
for cognitive adaptations to routine as well as novel situations. The
focus of this review is to investigate the capacity of this assumption
to explain expertise development in multiple domains. Starting from the
domain of medicine, in which such outcomes have been extensively
studied, three further domains are analysed. Evidence is reviewed from
counselling and psychotherapy, business management, and law. Thereby
specific methodological complications emerge concerning the criteria for
expert selection, the definition of levels of expertise, or the degree
of authenticity of participants' tasks. Nevertheless, direct and strong
indications for restructuring knowledge into scripts and macro-concepts
could be identified in all three domains. To further substantiate the
KR-CP theory, studies are needed that explicitly address the comparison
of case processing in different domains.