Can Cognitive Biases during Consumer Health Information Searches Be Reduced to Improve Decision Making?

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 54-65

  Lau, Annie Y S ^a   Coiera, Enrico W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; COGNITION; COMPUTER INTERFACE; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; METHODOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SEARCH ENGINE; STIMULUS; STUDENT; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

COGNITION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INTERNET; PREJUDICE; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 57149144788     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M2557     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Hersh W.R. Evidence-based medicine and the internet. ACP J Club 125 1 (1996) A14-A16
2. Eysenbach G., and Jadad A.R. Evidence-based patient choice and consumer health informatics in the internet age. J Med Internet Res. 3 2 (2001) e19
3. Westbrook J.I., Coiera E.W., and Gosling A.S. Do online information retrieval systems help experienced clinicians answer clinical questions?. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 12 3 (2005) 315-321
4. Hersh W.R. Ubiquitous but unfinished: On-line information retrieval systems. Med Decis Making 25 2 (2005) 147-148
5. Kahneman D., Slovic P., and Tversky A. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (1982), Cambridge University Press, New York
6. Elstein A.S. Heuristics and biases: Selected errors in clinical reasoning. Acad Med. 74 7 (1999) 791-794
7. Croskerry P. Achieving quality in clinical decision making: Cognitive strategies and detection of bias. Acad Emerg Med. 9 11 (2002) 1184-1204
8. Kaptchuk T.J. Effect of interpretive bias on research evidence. BMJ 326 7404 (2003) 1453-1455
9. Lau A.Y.S., and Coiera E.W. Do people experience cognitive biases while searching for information?. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 14 5 (2007) 599-608
10. Lau A.Y.S., and Coiera E.W. How do clinicians search for and access biomedical literature to answer clinical questions? (2007), MEDINFO 2007, Brisbane, Australia
11. Lau A.Y.S., and Coiera E.W. A Bayesian model that predicts the impact of web searching on decision making. J Am Soc Inform Scie Technol. 57 7 (2006) 873-880
12. de Mello G.E. In need of a favorable conclusion: The role of goal-motivated reasoning in consumer judgments and evaluations (2004), University of Southern California Summarised version of dissertation
13. Kruglanski A.W., and Ajzen I. Bias and error in human judgment. Eur J Soc Psychol. 13 1 (1983) 1-44
14. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185 4157 (1974) 1124-1131
15. Wickens C.D., and Hollands J.G. Decision making. Engineering psychology and human performance. 3rd ed. (2000), Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ 293-336
16. Brewer N.T., Chapman G.B., Schwartz J.B., and Bergus G.R. The influence of irrelevant anchors on the judgments and choices of doctors and patients. Med Decis Making 27 2 (2007) 203-211
17. In: Berner E., Maisiak R., Heudebert G., and Young K. (Eds). Clinician performance and prominence of diagnoses displayed by a clinical diagnostic decision support system AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings (2003)
18. Friedlander M., and Stockman S. Anchoring and publicity effects in clinical judgment. J Clin Psychol 39 (1983) 637-643
19. Lopes L.L. Procedural debiasing (1982), Wisconsin Human Information Processing Program, Madison Report No.: WHIPP15
20. George J.F., Duffy K., and Ahuja M. Countering the anchoring and adjustment bias with decision support systems. Decis Supp Syst. 29 2 (2000) 195-206
21. Weinstein N.D., and Klein W.M. Resistance of personal risk perceptions to debiasing interventions. Health Psychol. 14 2 (1995) 132-140
22. Curley S.P., Yates J.F., and Abrahms R.A. Psychological sources of ambiguity avoidance. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 38 2 (1986) 230-256
23. Tetlock P.E., and Boettger R. Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims. J Behav Decis Making 7 1 (1994) 1-23
24. Ashton R.H. Pressure and performance in accounting decision settings: Paradoxical effects of insentives, feedback and justification. J Account Res 28 Suppl (1990) 148-180
25. Sanna L.J., Schwarz N., and Stocker S.L. When debiasing backfires: Accessible content and accessibililty experiences in debiasing hindsight. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 28 3 (2002) 497-502
26. In: Wang H., Zhang J., and Johnson T.R. (Eds). Human belief revision and the order effect (2000), Twenty-second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Hillsdale, NJ
27. Murdock B.B. An analysis of the serial position curve. In: Roediger H.L.I., Nairne J.S., Neath I., and Surprenant A.M. (Eds). The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G Crowder (2001), American Psychological Association (APA)
28. Lund F.H. The psychology of belief: IV. The law of primacy in persuasion. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 20 (1925) 183-191
29. Cromwell H. The relative effect on audience attitude of the first versus the second argumentative speech of a series. Speech Monographs 17 (1950) 105-122
30. Luchins A.S. Primacy-recency in impression formation. In: Hovland C.I., Mandell E., Campbell E., Brock T., Luchins A.S., Cohen A., et al. (Eds). The order of presentation in persuasion (1957), Yale University Press, New Haven, CT 33-61
31. Mumma G.H., and Wilson S.B. Procedural debiasing of primacy/anchoring effects in clinical-like judgments. J Clin Psychol. 51 6 (1995) 841-853
32. Bergus G.R., Chapman G.B., Gjerde C., and Elstein A.S. Clinical reasoning about new symptoms despite preexisting disease: Sources of error and order effects. Fam Med 27 5 (1995) 314-320
33. Bergus G.R., Chapman G.B., Levy B.T., Ely J.W., and Oppliger R.A. Clinical diagnosis and the order of information. Med Decis Making 18 4 (1998) 412-417
34. Chapman G.B., Bergus G.R., and Elstein A.S. Order of information affects clinical judgment. J Behav Decis Making 9 3 (1996) 201-211
35. Cunnington J.P., Turnbull J.M., Regehr G., Marriott M., and Norman G.R. The effect of presentation order in clinical decision making. Acad Med 72 10 Suppl I (1997) S40-S2
36. Bergus G.R., Levin I.P., and Elstein A.S. Presenting risks and benefits to patients-the effect of information order on decision making. J Gen Intern Med. 17 8 (2002) 612-617
37. Ashton R.H., and Kennedy J. Eliminating recency with self-review: The case of auditors' 'going concern' judgments. J Behav Decis Making 15 3 (2002) 221-231
38. Lim K.H., Benbasat I., and Ward L.M. The role of multimedia in changing first impression bias. Inform Sys Res. 11 2 (2000) 115-136
39. Rai A., Stubbart C., and Paper D. Can executive information systems reinforce biases?. Account Manag Inform Technol. 4 2 (1994) 87-106
40. Shore B. Bias in the development and use of an expert system: Implications for life cycle costs. Industr Manag Data Sys. 96 4 (1996) 18-26
41. Arnold V., Collier P.A., Leech S.A., and Sutton S.G. The effect of experience and complexity on order and recency bias in decision making by professional accountants. Account Fin. 40 2 (2000) 109-134
42. Arnott D. Cognitive biases and decision support systems development: A design science approach. Inform Sys J. 16 1 (2006) 55-78
43. Marett K., and Adams G. The role of decision support in alleviating the familiarity bias (2006) Thirty-ninth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06) Track 2; Hawaii, USA
44. In: Clemen R.T., and Lichtendahl K.C. (Eds). Debiasing expert overconfidence: A Bayesian calibration model (2002) Sixth International Conference on Probablistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM6); San Juan, Puerto Rico, USA
45. Klayman J., and Brown K. Debias the environment instead of the judge: An alternative approach to reducing error in diagnostic (and other) judgment. Cognition 49 (1993) 97-122
46. Croskerry P. Cognitive forcing strategies in clinical decision making. Ann Emerg Med. 41 1 (2003) 110-120
47. Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med. 78 8 (2003) 775-780
48. Jolls C., and Sunstein C.R. Debiasing through law. J Legal Stud. 35 (2006) 199-241
49. Roy M.C., and Lerch F.J. Overcoming ineffective mental representations in base-rate problems. Inform Sys Res. 7 2 (1996) 233-247
50. Chandra A., and Krovi R. Representational congruence and information retrieval: Towards an extended model of cognitive fit. Decis Supp Sys. 25 4 (1999) 271-288
51. Hearst M.A. User interfaces and visualization. In: Baeza-Yates R., and Ribeiro-Neto B. (Eds). Modern information retrieval. 1st ed. (1999), Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA 257-324
52. Coiera E., Walther M., Nguyen K., and Lovell N.H. Architecture for knowledge-based and federated search of online clinical evidence. JMIR 7 5 (2005) e52
53. Arkes H.R. Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing. Psychol Bull. 110 3 (1991) 486-498
54. Elting L.S., Martin C.G., Cantor S.B., and Rubenstein E.B. Influence of data display formats on physician investigators' decisions to stop clinical trials: Prospective trial with repeated measures. BMJ 318 7197 (1999) 1527-1531
55. Hedwig M., and Natter D. Effects of active information processing on the understanding of risk information. Appl Cog Psychol. 19 1 (2005) 123-135
56. Newell B., and Rakow T. The role of experience in decisions from description. Psychonom Bull Rev. 14 6 (2007) 1133-1139
57. Karlsson L., Juslin P., and Olsson H. Exemplar-based inference in multi-attribute decision making: Contingent, not automatic, strategy shifts?. Judg Decis Making 3 3 (2008) 244-260
58. Tubbs R.M., Gaeth G.J., Levin I.P., and Van Osdol L.A. Order effects in belief updating with consistent and inconsistent evidence. J Behav Decis Making 6 (1993) 257-269
59. Pett M.A. Nonparametric statistics for health care research: Statistics for small samples and unusual distributions (1997), Sage Publications Inc, London 79-92
60. Westbrook J.I., Gosling A.S., and Coiera E.W. The impact of an online evidence system on confidence in decision making in a controlled setting. Med Decis Making 25 2 (2005) 178-185
61. Purgailis Parker L.M., and Johnson R.E. Does order of presentation affect users' judgment of documents?. J Am Soc Inform Sci. 41 7 (1990) 493-494
62. Huang M., and Wang H. The influence of document presentation order and number of documents judged on users' judgments of relevance. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol. 55 11 (2004) 970-979
63. Coiera E., and Vickland V. Is relevance relevant?. User relevance ratings do not predict the impact of internet search engines on decisions. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 15 (2008) 542-545
64. Sumer H.C., and Knight P.A. Assimilation and contrast effects in performance ratings: Effects of rating the previous performance on rating subsequent performance. J Appl Psychol. 81 4 (1996) 436-442
65. Smither J.W., Reilly R.R., and Buda R. Effect of prior performance information on ratings of present performance: Contrast versus assimilation revisited. J Appl Psychol. 73 3 (1988) 487-496
66. Murphy K.R., Balzer W.K., Lockhart M.C., and Eisenman E.J. Effects of previous performance on evaluations of present performance. J Appl Psychol. 70 1 (1985) 72-84
67. Coiera E., Westbrook J., and Rogers K. Clinical decision velocity is increased when meta-search filters enhance an evidence retrieval system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. (2008) doi:10.1197/jamia.M2765
68. Friedman C., Gatti G., Franz T., et al. Do physicians know when their diagnoses are correct?. Implications for decision support and error reduction. J Gen Intern Med. 20 4 (2005) 334-339