Literature DB >> 27111357

Biases and Heuristics in Decision Making and Their Impact on Autonomy.

J S Blumenthal-Barby1.   

Abstract

Cognitive scientists have identified a wide range of biases and heuristics in human decision making over the past few decades. Only recently have bioethicists begun to think seriously about the implications of these findings for topics such as agency, autonomy, and consent. This article aims to provide an overview of biases and heuristics that have been identified and a framework in which to think comprehensively about the impact of them on the exercise of autonomous decision making. I analyze the impact that these biases and heuristics have on the following dimensions of autonomy: understanding, intentionality, absence of alienating or controlling influence, and match between formally autonomous preferences or decisions and actual choices or actions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  autonomy; behavioral economics; cognitive biases and heuristics; cognitive science; decision making

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27111357     DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2016.1159750

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Bioeth        ISSN: 1526-5161            Impact factor:   11.229


  9 in total

1.  Practitioner Bias as an Explanation for Low Rates of Palliative Care Among Patients with Advanced Dementia.

Authors:  Meira Erel; Esther-Lee Marcus; Freda Dekeyser-Ganz
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2021-03-30

2.  Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatments in Perceived Devastating Brain Injury: The Key Role of Uncertainty.

Authors:  Christos Lazaridis
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 3.210

3.  Comparative Risk: Good or Bad Heuristic?

Authors:  Peter H Schwartz
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 11.229

4.  Using Default Options and Other Nudges to Improve Critical Care.

Authors:  Scott D Halpern
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 5.  Historical Perspectives: Shared Decision Making in the NICU.

Authors:  Anne Sullivan; Christy Cummings
Journal:  Neoreviews       Date:  2020-04

6.  Perspectives on using decision-making nudges in physician-patient communications.

Authors:  Ilona Fridman; Joanna L Hart; Kuldeep N Yadav; E Tory Higgins
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Donor Autonomy and Self-Sacrifice in Living Organ Donation: An Ethical Legal and Psychological Aspects of Transplantation (ELPAT) View.

Authors:  Nizam Mamode; Kristof Van Assche; Lisa Burnapp; Aisling Courtney; David van Dellen; Mireille Houthoff; Hannah Maple; Greg Moorlock; Frank J M F Dor; Annette Lennerling
Journal:  Transpl Int       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 3.782

8.  Therapeutic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty in the Management of Spinal Muscular Atrophy: Results From DECISIONS-SMA Study.

Authors:  Gustavo Saposnik; Ana Camacho; Paola Díaz-Abós; María Brañas-Pampillón; Victoria Sánchez-Menéndez; Rosana Cabello-Moruno; María Terzaghi; Jorge Maurino; Ignacio Málaga
Journal:  Neurol Ther       Date:  2022-06-03

9.  Polygenic risk score for embryo selection-not ready for prime time.

Authors:  Alex Polyakov; David J Amor; Julian Savulescu; Christopher Gyngell; Ektoras X Georgiou; Vanessa Ross; Yossi Mizrachi; Genia Rozen
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 6.353

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.