Literature DB >> 26302010

Values and preferences: defining preference construction.

Caleb Warren1, A Peter McGraw1, Leaf Van Boven1.   

Abstract

Extensive research in the values and preferences literature suggests that preferences are sensitive to context and calculated at the time of choice. This has led to the view that preferences are constructed. Recent work calls for a better understanding of when preferences are constructed and when they are not. We contend that the answer to this question depends on the meaning of the term constructed. Constructed can mean that a preference changes across contexts. If construction is synonymous with context sensitivity, we contend that preferences are always constructed because context influences nearly every aspect of the judgment and choice process. As a motivating example, we show that preferences are influenced by goals and goals are highly context sensitive. Constructed, however, can mean instead that a preference is calculated or formulated during the judgment and choice process. If construction is synonymous with calculation, we contend that many preferences are calculated and the more important question is to what degree preferences are calculated. We review the literature that shows that the degree to which decision makers calculate preferences is influenced by goals, cognitive constraints, and experience. WIREs Cogni Sci 2011 2 193-205 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.98 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.
Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Year:  2010        PMID: 26302010     DOI: 10.1002/wcs.98

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci        ISSN: 1939-5078


  18 in total

1.  A Preference-Based Model of Care: An Integrative Theoretical Model of the Role of Preferences in Person-Centered Care.

Authors:  Kimberly Van Haitsma; Katherine M Abbott; Annabelle Arbogast; Lauren R Bangerter; Allison R Heid; Liza L Behrens; Caroline Madrigal
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  2020-04-02

2.  Understanding patients' values and preferences regarding early stage lung cancer treatment decision making.

Authors:  Donald R Sullivan; Karen B Eden; Nathan F Dieckmann; Sara E Golden; Kelly C Vranas; Shannon M Nugent; Christopher G Slatore
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2019-03-09       Impact factor: 5.705

Review 3.  Serious Choices: A Protocol for an Environmental Scan of Patient Decision Aids for Seriously Ill People at Risk of Death Facing Choices about Life-Sustaining Treatments.

Authors:  Catherine H Saunders; Glyn Elwyn; Kathryn Kirkland; Marie-Anne Durand
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Trading mental effort for confidence in the metacognitive control of value-based decision-making.

Authors:  Douglas G Lee; Jean Daunizeau
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 8.140

5.  Effects of Personalized Risk Information on Patients Referred for Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Christine Lary; Adam Black; Caitlin Gutheil; Hayley Mandeville; Jason Yahwak; Mayuko Fukunaga
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-10-20       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 6.  N-of-1 trials to facilitate evidence-based deprescribing: Rationale and case study.

Authors:  Parag Goyal; Monika M Safford; Sarah N Hilmer; Michael A Steinman; Daniel D Matlock; Mathew S Maurer; Mark S Lachs; Ian M Kronish
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 3.716

7.  (Re)Conceptualising 'good' proxy decision-making for research: the implications for proxy consent decision quality.

Authors:  Victoria Shepherd
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 2.834

8.  The Change in Nursing Home Residents' Preferences Over Time.

Authors:  Katherine M Abbott; Allison R Heid; Morton Kleban; Michael J Rovine; Kimberly Van Haitsma
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.669

9.  Childbirth Education Prior to Pregnancy? Survey Findings of Childbirth Preferences and Attitudes Among Young Women.

Authors:  Joyce K Edmonds; Taylor Cwiertniewicz; Kathrin Stoll
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2015

Review 10.  Decision Making Among Persons Living With Heart Failure.

Authors:  Jiayun Xu; Martha Abshire; Hae-Ra Han
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Nurs       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.083

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.