课题基金 / 基金详情

Collaborative Research: The Reluctance to Use Decision Aids

Collaborative Research: The Reluctance to Use Decision Aids
协作研究:不愿使用决策辅助工具
批准号:
0326468
负责人:
Hal Arkes
金额:
$0.0万
依托单位国家:
美国
项目类别:
Continuing Grant
财政年份:
2003
资助国家:
美国
项目状态:
已结题
起止时间:
2003-08-01 至 2008-07-31

项目摘要

项目成果

Hal Arkes的其他基金

相似基金

相关文献

中文摘要
翻译
点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要
英文摘要
Four experiments will be run in order to investigate why professions are reluctant to use decision aids. In the first study patients in a waiting room of a clinic will read various versions of a scenario in which a doctor either does or does not use an aid in making a diagnosis. We will assess the patients' opinion concerning the competence of the physician in each scenario, the hypothesis being that doctors who use a decision aid might be perceived as less capable than physicians who eschew the use of an aid. We will also assess the opinion of doctors concerning their colleagues who do or don't use decision aids in making diagnoses.In the second study a videotape of a malpractice trial will be shown to community members. In the trial the defendant, a physician, either did or didn't use a decision aid in making a diagnosis that led to an adverse outcome. The viewers of the videotape will decide whether the physician is guilty of malpractice. Doctors will also watch the tape and will render an opinion concerning the physician and will also predict the verdict of the jurors. We are interested in whether using a decision aid either insulates a physician from or exposes a physician to negative malpractice verdicts.The third study is similar to the second. However in this study a mental health professional described in a scenario will be make a judgment about the dangerousness of an inpatient in order to determine whether he should be released. In some versions of the scenario the professional uses a decision aid; in some an aid is not used. An adverse outcome occurs in all cases. Mental health professionals will decide whether the professional described in the scenario acted responsibly.In the final study emergency room physicians will read a case describing a disease and will render a diagnosis. They will also express their confidence in their diagnosis, and they will decide whether they wish to use a decision aid. We predict that the more confident physicians will eschew the use of the aid.The goal of all studies is to discover reasons why professional decision makers refuse to use aids which would heighten the accuracy of their decisions. ABSTRACTPrincipal investigator: Douglas, KevinInstitution: University of South FloridaProposal ID : 0326490Proposal Title: Collaborative Research: The Reluctance to Use Decision Aids Four experiments will be run in order to investigate why professions are reluctant to use decision aids. In the first study patients in a waiting room of a clinic will read various versions of a scenario in which a doctor either does or does not use an aid in making a diagnosis. We will assess the patients' opinion concerning the competence of the physician in each scenario, the hypothesis being that doctors who use a decision aid might be perceived as less capable than physicians who eschew the use of an aid. We will also assess the opinion of doctors concerning their colleagues who do or don't use decision aids in making diagnoses.In the second study a videotape of a malpractice trial will be shown to community members. In the trial the defendant, a physician, either did or didn't use a decision aid in making a diagnosis that led to an adverse outcome. The viewers of the videotape will decide whether the physician is guilty of malpractice. Doctors will also watch the tape and will render an opinion concerning the physician and will also predict the verdict of the jurors. We are interested in whether using a decision aid either insulates a physician from or exposes a physician to negative malpractice verdicts.The third study is similar to the second. However in this study a mental health professional described in a scenario will be make a judgment about the dangerousness of an inpatient in order to determine whether he should be released. In some versions of the scenario the professional uses a decision aid; in some an aid is not used. An adverse outcome occurs in all cases. Mental health professionals will decide whether the professional described in the scenario acted responsibly.In the final study emergency room physicians will read a case describing a disease and will render a diagnosis. They will also express their confidence in their diagnosis, and they will decide whether they wish to use a decision aid. We predict that the more confident physicians will eschew the use of the aid.The goal of all studies is to discover reasons why professional decision makers refuse to use aids which would heighten the accuracy of their decisions.
期刊论文(0)
专著(0)
科研奖励(0)
会议论文
RAPID: Testing Important Judgment/Decision Making Phenomena in the High-Incentive Context of Covid-19: The Understanding of Physicians and Laypersons
  • 批准号:
    2029857
  • 项目类别:
    Standard Grant
  • 资助金额:
    $8.67万
  • 财政年份:
    2020
  • 负责人:
    Hal Arkes
  • 依托单位:
Cognitive Bases of Hindsight Effects
EITM: Collaborative Research: Reference Point Adaptation and Mental Accounting: Dynamic Extensions of Prospect Theory
Using Scientific Materials to Compare Disaggregated Versus Holistic Ratings
国内基金
海外基金
Research on Quantum Field Theory without a Lagrangian Description
  • 批准号:
    24ZR1403900
  • 项目类别:
    省市级项目
  • 资助金额:
    --
  • 批准年份:
    2024
  • 负责人:
    SATOSHI NAWATA
  • 依托单位:
Cell Research
Cell Research
Cell Research (细胞研究)