The default effect in end-of-life medical treatment preferences

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 299-310

  Kressel, Laura M ^a,b   Chapman, Gretchen B ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision psychology; Default effect; Living wills

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COLLEGE STUDENT; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNET; LIVING WILL; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PATIENT CARE; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TERMINAL CARE;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; INTERNET; LIVING WILLS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUESTIONNAIRES; TERMINAL CARE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34248997202     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07300608     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Choices, values and frames. Am Psychol. 1984 ; 39: 341 - 50.
2. McNeil B., Pauker S., Sox H., Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med. 1982 ; 306: 1259 - 62.
3. Bellman S., Johnson EJ, Lohse G. To opt-in or opt-out? It depends on the question. Commun ACM. 2001 ; 44: 25 - 7.
4. Johnson EJ, Bellman S., Lohse G. Defaults, framing and privacy: why opting in-opting out. Marketing Letters. 2001 ; 13: 5 - 15.
5. Johnson EJ, Goldstein D. Do defaults save lives? Science. 2003 ; 302: 1338 - 9.
6. Johnson EJ, Steffel M., Goldsten D. Making better decisions: from measuring to constructing preferences. Health Psychol. 2005 ; 24: S17 - S22.
7. Madrian BC, Shea DF The power of suggestion: inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2001 ; 116: 1149 - 87.
8. Spranca M., Minsk E., Baron J. Omission and commission in judgment and choice. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1991 ; 27: 49 - 61.
9. Baron J., Ritov I. Reference points and omission bias. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1994 ; 59: 475 - 98.
10. Ritov I., Baron J. Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. J Behav Decis Making. 1990 ; 3: 263 - 77.
11. Schweitzer M. Disentangling status quo and omission effects: an experimental analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1994 ; 58: 457 - 76.
12. Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ The Adaptive Decision Maker. New York: Cambridge University Press ; 1993.
13. Ditto PH, Danks JH, Smucker WD, et al. Advance directives as acts of communication. Arch Intern Med. 2001 ; 161: 421 - 30.
14. Coppola KM, Ditto PH, Danks JH, Smucker WD, Bookwala J. Accuracy of primary care and hospital-based physicians' predictions of elderly outpatients' treatment preferences with and without advance directives. Arch Intern Med. 2001 ; 161: 431 - 40.
15. Rozin P., Bauer R., Catanese D. Food and life, pleasure and worry, among American college students: gender differences and regional similarities. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 ; 85: 132 - 41.
16. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979 ; 86: 420 - 8.
17. Shafir E. Choosing versus rejecting: why some options are both better and worse than others. Mem Cognit. 1993 ; 21: 546 - 56.
18. McKenzie CR, Liersch MJ, Finkelstein SR Recommendations implicit in policy defaults. Psychol Sci. 2006 ; 17: 414 - 20.
19. Fagerlin A., Schneider CE Enough: the failure of the living will. Hastings Cent Rep. 2004 ; 34: 30 - 42.
20. Kressel, LM, Chapman, GB, Leventhal, E. The Influence of Default Options on the expression of end-of-life treatment preferences in advance directives. J Gen Intern Med. In press.