Efficacy of a web-based intelligent tutoring system for communicating genetic risk of breast cancer: A fuzzy-trace theory approach

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 46-59

  Wolfe, Christopher R ^a   Reyna, Valerie F ^b   Widmer, Colin L ^a   Cedillos, Elizabeth M ^a   Fisher, Christopher R ^a   Brust Renck, Priscila G ^b   Weil, Audrey M ^a  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer risk; Fuzzy Trace Theory; genetic testing; Intelligent Tutoring System

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BREAST TUMOR; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FUZZY LOGIC; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC SCREENING; GENETICS; HUMAN; INTERNET; PATIENT EDUCATION; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE; YOUNG ADULT;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FUZZY LOGIC; GENES, BRCA1; GENES, BRCA2; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTERNET; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84919474623     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14535983     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. National Cancer Institute. Breast cancer risk in American women. Available from: URL: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/detection/probability-breast-cancer. Updated 24September2012. Accessed 5 June 2013.
2. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts & figures 2011-2012. Available from: URL: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@epidemiologysurveilance/documents/document/acspc-030975.pdf. Accessed 16 January 2014.
3. Gram IT, Slenker SE. Cancer anxiety and attitudes toward mammography among screening attenders, nonattenders, and women never invited. Am J Public Health. 1992 ; 82: 249-51
4. Finnney RLJ, Gollust SE, Naveed S, Moser RP. Increasing public awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic tests: health care access, Internet use, and population density correlates. J Cancer Epidemiol. 2012 ; 2012: 1-7
5. JolieA. My medical choice. New York Times. Available from: URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/opinion/my-medical-choice.html?-r=1&. Updated 14May2013. Accessed 16 January 2014.
6. Offit K. BRCA mutation frequency and penetrance: new data, old debate. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 ; 98 (23). 1675-7
7. Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ, Whalen P. Genetic testing and medical decision making. Arch Intern Med. 2001 2406 ; 161 ( 20 ):
8. Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, Dieckmann NF. How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychol Bull. 2009 ; 135 (6). 943-73
9. AgusDB. The outrageous cost of a gene test. New York Times. Available from: URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/opinion/the-outrageous-cost-of-a-gene-test.html?-r=0. Updated 20May2013. Accessed 16 January 2013.
10. AndrewsM. Coverage gaps can hamper access to some breast cancer screening, care. Kaiser Health News. Available from: URL: http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Features/Insuring-Your-Health/2013/052813-Michelle-Andrews-on-breast-cancer-care.aspx. Updated 27May2013. Accessed 16 January 2014.
11. Armstrong K, Eisen A, Weber B. Assessing the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000 ; 342 (8). 564-71
12. Stefanek M, Hartmann L, Nelson W. Risk-reduction mastectomy: clinical issues and research needs. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001 ; 93: 1297-306
13. Chao C, Studts JL, Abell T, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: how presentation of recurrence risk influences decision-making. J Clin Oncol. 2003 ; 21 (23). 4299-305
14. O'Neill SC, DeMarco T, Peshki BN, et al. Tolerance for uncertainty and perceived risk among women receiving uninformative BRCA1/2 test results. Am J Med Genet. 2006 ; 142C: 251-9
15. Han PK, Klein WM, Arora NK. Varieties of uncertainty in health care: a conceptual taxonomy. Med Decis Making. 2011 ; 31 (6). 828-38
16. Berliner JL, Fay AM. Risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Couns. 2007 ; 16: 241-60
17. Gaff CL, Clarke AJ, Atkinson P, et al. Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet. 2007 ; 15: 1-13
18. Genetic Information Discrimination. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Available from: URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/genetic.cfm. Accessed 16 January 2014.
19. Wolfe CR, Widmer CL, Reyna VF, et al. The development and analysis of tutorial dialogues in AutoTutor Lite. Behav Res Meth. 2013 ; 45: 623-36
20. Chi MTH, Siler SA, Jeong H, Yamauchi T, Hausmann RG. Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Sci. 2005 ; 25: 471-533
21. Bloom BS. The 2 Sigma problem: the search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educ Res. 1984 ; 136: 4-16
22. VanLehn K. The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educ Psychol. 2011 ; 46: 197-221
23. Amir E, Freedman OC, Seruga B, Evans DG. Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 ; 102 (10). 680-1
24. Graesser AC. Learning, thinking, and emoting with discourse technologies. Am Psychol. 2011 ; 66 (8). 746-57
25. Reyna VF. A theory of medical decision making and health: fuzzy trace theory. Med Decis Making. 2008 ; 28 (6). 850-65
26. Lloyd FJ, Reyna VF. Clinical gist and medical education: connecting the dots. JAMA. 2009 ; 302 (12). 1332-3
27. Graesser AC, McNamara DS, VanLehn K. Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point&Query, AutoTutor, and iSTART. Educ Psychol. 2005 ; 40 (4). 225-34
28. Azevedo R, Lajoie SP. The cognitive basis for the design of a mammography interpretation tutor. Int J Artif Intell Educ. 1998 ; 9: 32-44
29. Krebs P, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS. A meta-analysis of computer-tailored interventions for health behavior change. Prev Med. 2010 ; 51 (3-4). 214-21
30. Wolfe CR, Fisher CR, Reyna VF, Hu X. Improving internal consistency in conditional probability estimation with an intelligent tutoring system and Web-based tutorials. Int J Internet Sci. 2012 ; 7: 38-54
31. Graesser AC, McNamara DS. Self-regulated learning in learning environments with pedagogical agents that interact in natural language. Educ Psychol. 2010 ; 45 (4). 234-44
32. Graesser AC, Chipman P, Haynes BC, Olney A. AutoTutor: an intelligent tutoring system with mixed-initiative dialogue. IEEE T Educ. 2005 ; 48 (4). 612-8
33. Graesser AC, Wiemer-Hastings P, Wiemer-Hastings K, Harter D, Person N. The Tutoring Research Group. Using latent semantic analysis to evaluate the contributions of students in AutoTutor. Interact Learn Environ. 2000 ; 8 (2). 129-47
34. Landauer TK, Foltz PW, Laham D. An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Process. 1998 ; 25: 259-84
35. Hu X, Cai Z, Wiemer-Hastings P, Graeser AC, McNamara DS Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis. Landauer TK, ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates ; 2007: 401-25.
36. Landauer TK, Dumais ST. A solution to Plato's problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychol Rev. 1997 ; 104: 211-40
37. VanLehn K, Graesser AC, Jackson GT, Jordan P, Olney A, Rose CP. When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading?. Cognitive Sci. 2007 ; 31: 3-62
38. Roscoe RD, Chi MTH. Tutor learning: the role of explaining and responding to questions. Instr Sci. 2008 ; 36 (4). 321-50
39. Mackay J, Schulz P, Rubinelli S, Pithers A. Online patient education and risk assessment: project OPERA from cancerbackup: putting inherited breast cancer risk information into context using argumentation theory. Patient Educ Couns. 2007 ; 67: 261-6
40. RubinelliSSchulzPJPaoliniP. Argumentation in good news communication on genetic breast cancer: the experience of OPERA. Proceedings of CMNA. Available from: URL: http://www.cmna.info/CMNA8/programme/CMNA8-Rubinelli-etal.pdf. Updated 2008. Accessed 20 January 2014
41. Reyna VF, Kiernan B. Development of gist versus verbatim memory in sentence recognition: effects of lexical familiarity, semantic content, encoding instructions, and retention interval. Dev Psychol. 1994 ; 30 (2). 178-91
42. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ Subjective Probability. Wright G Ayton P, ed. New York: Wiley ; 1994: 239-72.
43. Reyna VF. Theories of medical decision making and health: an evidence-based approach. Med Decis Making. 2008 ; 28: 829-33
44. Reyna VF. A new intuitionism: meaning, memory, and development in fuzzy-trace theory. Judgm Decis Mak. 2012 ; 7 (3). 332-59
45. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: a fuzzy-trace model. Dev Rev. 2011 ; 31: 180-206
46. Reyna VF, Ellis SC. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in children's risky decision-making. Psychol Sci. 1994 ; 5 (5). 275-9
47. Adam MB, Reyna VF. Coherence and correspondence criteria for rationality: experts' estimation of risks of sexually transmitted infections. J Behav Decis Making. 2005 ; 18 (3). 169-86
48. Reyna VF, Farley F. Risk and rationality in adolescent decision making: implications for theory, practice, and public policy. Psychol Sci. 2006 ; 7 (1). 1-44
49. Reyna VF, Chick CF, Corbin JC, Hsia AN. Developmental reversals in risky decision-making: intelligence agents show larger decision biases than college students. Psychol Sci. 2014 ; 25 (1). 76-84
50. Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ. Physician decision making and cardiac risk: effects of knowledge, risk perception, risk tolerance, and fuzzy processing. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2006 ; 12: 179-95
51. Mills B, Reyna VF, Estrada S. Explaining contradictory relations between risk perception and risk taking. Psychol Sci. 2008 ; 19: 429-33
52. Reyna VF, Estrada SM, DeMarinis JA, Myers RM, Stanisz JM, Mills BA. Neurobiological and memory models of risky decision making in adolescents versus young adults. J Exp Psychol Learn. 2011 ; 37 (5). 1125-42
53. Lloyd FJ, Reyna VF. A Web exercise in evidence-based medicine using cognitive theory. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 ; 16 (2). 94-9
54. Reyna VF, Mills BA. Theoretically motivated interventions for reducing sexual risk taking in adolescence: a randomized controlled experiment applying fuzzy-trace theory. J Exp Psychol Gen.. In press ;:
55. Wolfe CR, Reyna VF. Semantic coherence and fallacies in estimating joint probabilities. J Behav Decis Making. 2010 ; 23: 203-23
56. Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, Pignone MP. Decision making and cancer. Am Psychol. In press ;:
57. Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W. Heuristic decision making. Annu Rev Psychol. 2011 ; 62: 451-82
58. Portnoy DB, Roter D, Erby LH. The role of numeracy on client knowledge in BRCA genetic counseling. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 ; 81 (1). 131-6
59. Fraenkel L, Peters E, Charpentier P, Olsen B, Errante L, Schoen RT, Reyna VF. Decision tool to improve the quality of care in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthrit Care Res. 2012 ; 64: 977-85
60. Fukukura J, Ferguson MJ, Fujita K. Psychological distance can improve decision making under information overload via gist memory. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2013 ; 142: 658-65
61. Wolfe CR, Fisher CR, Reyna VF. Semantic coherence and inconsistency in estimating conditional probabilities. J Behav Decis Making. In press ;:
62. Wolfe CR. Information seeking on Bayesian conditional probability problems: a fuzzy-trace theory account. J Behav Decis Making. 1995 ; 8: 85-108
63. Green MJ, Peterson SK, Baker MW, et al. Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004 ; 292 (4). 442-52
64. Wilfond BS, Rothenberg KH, Thomson EJ, Lerman C. Cancer genetic susceptibility testing: ethical and policy implications for future research and clinical practice. J Law Med Ethics. 1997 ; 25: 243-51
65. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ. Numeracy, ratio bias, and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability. Learn Individ Differ. 2008 ; 18 (1). 89-107
66. Hoskins KF, Zwaagstra A, Ranz M. Validation of a tool for identifying women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer in population-based screening. Cancer. 2006 ; 107: 1769-76
67. Hall J, Gray S, A'Hern R, et al. Genetic testing for BRCA1: effects of a randomised study of knowledge provision on interest in testing and long term test uptake; implications for the NICE guidelines. Fam Cancer. 2009 ; 8: 5-13
68. Andersen MR, Smith R, Meischke H, Bowen D, Urban N. Breast cancer worry and mammography use by women with and without a family history in a population-based sample. Cancer Epidem Biom. 2003 ; 12: 314-20
69. Spielberger CD Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press ; 1983 :
70. Schmider E, Ziegler M, Danay E, Beyer L, Buhner M. Is it really robust? Reinvestigating the robustness of ANOVA against violations of the normal distribution assumption. Methodol. 2010 ; (4). 147-51
71. DeCarlo LT. On the meaning and use of kurtosis. Psychol Meth. 1997 ; 2 (3). 292-307
72. Welch BL. On the comparison of several mean values: an alternative approach. Biometrika. 1951 ; 38: 330-6
73. Wolfe CR, Britt MA, Petrovic M, Albrecht M, Kopp K. The efficacy of a Web-based counterargument tutor. Behav Res Meth. 2009 ; 41: 691-8
74. Wolfe CR, Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective. Mestre JP, ed. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press ; 2005: 53-88.
75. Francis G. Publication bias and the failure of replication in experimental psychology. Psychol Bull Rev. 2012 ; 19: 975-91
76. Fagerlin A, Pignone M, Abhyankar P, et al. Clarifying values: an updated review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013 ; 13: S8