Literature DB >> 18164168

Framing effect debiasing in medical decision making.

Sammy Almashat1, Brian Ayotte, Barry Edelstein, Jennifer Margrett.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have demonstrated the robustness of the framing effect in a variety of contexts. The present study investigated the effects of a debiasing procedure designed to prevent the framing effect for young adults who made decisions based on hypothetical medical decision-making vignettes.
METHODS: The debiasing technique involved participants listing advantages and disadvantages of each treatment prior to making a choice. One hundred and two undergraduate students read a set of three medical treatment vignettes that presented information in terms of different outcome probabilities under either debiasing or control conditions.
RESULTS: The framing effect was demonstrated by the control group in two of the three vignettes. The debiasing group successfully avoided the framing effect for both of these vignettes.
CONCLUSION: These results further support previous findings of the framing effect as well as an effective debiasing technique. This study improved upon previous framing debiasing studies by including a control group and personal medical scenarios, as well as demonstrating debiasing in a framing condition in which the framing effect was demonstrated without a debiasing procedure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The findings suggest a relatively simple manipulation may circumvent the use of decision-making heuristics in patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18164168     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.11.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  14 in total

1.  Management of Crohn's disease - are guidelines transferred to clinical practice?

Authors:  Thomas Klag; Eduard F Stange; Jan Wehkamp
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.623

2.  Are health nudges coercive?

Authors:  Muireann Quigley
Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev       Date:  2014 Mar-Jun

3.  How to reduce the effect of framing on messages about health.

Authors:  Rocio Garcia-Retamero; Mirta Galesic
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 4.  Decision-making heuristics and biases across the life span.

Authors:  Jonell Strough; Tara E Karns; Leo Schlosnagle
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 5.691

5.  How to activate intuitive and reflective thinking in behavior research? A comprehensive examination of experimental techniques.

Authors:  Ozan Isler; Onurcan Yilmaz
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-10-17

6.  Don't Throw Your Heart Away: Increased Transparency of Donor Utilization Practices in Transplant Center Report Cards Alters How Center Performance Is Evaluated.

Authors:  Alison E Butler; Gretchen B Chapman
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Alternation between different types of evidence attenuates judgments of severity.

Authors:  Jennifer C Whitman; Jiaying Zhao; Rebecca M Todd
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The attitude-behavior discrepancy in medical decision making.

Authors:  Fei He; Dongdong Li; Rong Cao; Juli Zeng; Hao Guan
Journal:  Iran Red Crescent Med J       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 0.611

9.  Differences in simulated doctor and patient medical decision making: a construal level perspective.

Authors:  Jiaxi Peng; Fei He; Yan Zhang; Quanhui Liu; Danmin Miao; Wei Xiao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cognitive Style and Frame Susceptibility in Decision-Making.

Authors:  David R Mandel; Irina V Kapler
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-08-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.