Image Theory’s counting rule in clinical decision making: Does it describe how clinicians make patient-specific forecasts?
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2012, Vol 7, Issue 3
Abstract
The field of clinical decision making is polarized by two predominate views. One holds that treatment recommendations should conform with guidelines; the other emphasizes clinical expertise in reaching case-specific judgments. Previous work developed a test for a proposed alternative, that clinical judgment should systematically incorporate both general knowledge and patient-specific information. The test was derived from image theory’s two phase-account of decision making and its “simple counting rule”, which describes how possible courses of action are pre-screened for compatibility with standards and values. The current paper applies this rule to clinical forecasting, where practitioners indicate how likely a specific patient will respond favorably to a recommended treatment. Psychiatric trainees evaluated eight case vignettes that exhibited from 0 to 3 incompatible attributes. They made two forecasts, one based on a guideline recommendation, the other based on their own alternative. Both forecasts were predicted by equally- and unequally-weighted counting rules. Unequal weighting provided a better fit and exhibited a clearer rejection threshold, or point at which forecasts are not diminished by additional incompatibilities. The hypothesis that missing information is treated as an incompatibility was not confirmed. There was evidence that the rejection threshold was influenced by clinician preference. Results suggests that guidelines may have a de-biasing influence on clinical judgment. Subject to limitations pertaining to the subject sample and population, clinical paradigm, guideline, and study procedure, the data support the use of a compatibility test to describe how clinicians make patient-specific forecasts.
Authors and Affiliations
Paul R. Falzer and Melissa Garman
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677890
- DOI -
- Views 138
- Downloads 0
Different heuristics and same bias: A spectral analysis of biased judgments and individual decision rules
We used correlation and spectral analyses to investigate the cognitive structures and processes producing biased judgments. We used 5 different sets of driving problems to exemplify problems that trigger biases, specific...
Strategies using recent feedback lead to matching or maximising behaviours
One challenge facing humans (and nonhuman animal) is that some options that appear attractive locally may not turn out best in the long run. To analyse this human learning problem, we explore human performance in a dynam...
Recognition-based judgments and decisions: What we have learned (so far)
This special issue on recognition processes in inferential decision making represents an adversarial collaboration among the three guest editors. This introductory article to the special issue’s third and final part come...
Why do we overestimate others’ willingness to pay?
People typically overestimate how much others are prepared to pay for consumer goods and services. We investigated the extent to which latent beliefs about others’ affluence contribute to this overestimation. In Studies...
Boosting intelligence analysts’ judgment accuracy: What works, what fails?
A routine part of intelligence analysis is judging the probability of alternative hypotheses given available evidence. Intelligence organizations advise analysts to use intelligence-tradecraft methods such as Analysis of...