China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Community Retail Pharmacies
Published in Rupa S. Valdez, Richard J. Holden, The Patient Factor, 2021
Michelle A. Chui, Ashley Morris, David Mott
The false-consensus effect is important to consider in the pharmacy setting because of its impact on another bias, the overconfidence effect (belief that everyone knows one’s own knowledge). This can be dangerous for patient–pharmacist encounters as pharmacists are critical agents for teaching health information and providing resources, and the overconfidence effect may lead to pharmacists providing fewer resources to patients. I was going over all of her medications after she was released from the hospital. I asked her to show me how she used her Spiriva. The directions said, ‘Inhale the contents of one capsule once a day.’ She put the capsule in the inhaler. Then she inhaled but she never pierced the capsule. She was just getting plain air. Even though I thought the directions were clear, she was not taking the medicine properly.(Community Pharmacist) (Sparks et al., 2018)
Major Schools of Psychology
Published in Mohamed Ahmed Abd El-Hay, Understanding Psychology for Medicine and Nursing, 2019
It is noteworthy that other psychological theoretical perspectives have addressed the psychoanalytic defenses, giving them different labels. Social psychologists addressed the cognitive processes of projection under the name of attribution (or later, the false consensus effect); displacement formed the basis of early work on scapegoating; aspects of denial have been reorganized as positive illusions; and undoing has been relabeled “counterfactual thinking” (Paulhus, Fridhandler, & Hayes, 1997).
Risk within maternity and how this impacts midwives’ decision-making
Published in Elaine Jefford, Julie Jomeen, Empowering Decision-Making in Midwifery, 2019
The aim of this book is to critically review a range of decision-making theories and their relevance to midwifery practice. Through this aim, the links between midwifery governance, risk and safety are explored to encourage critical thinking and reflection as an essential element of clinical decision-making. The contribution this chapter will make to this debate is to demonstrate the impact of the socio/policy context of risk on midwifery clinical decision-making. To achieve this, the chapter introduces two propositions. The first is that sensitivity to risk is not only omnipresent in maternity care across the world; its meaning is not self-evident and therefore deserves critical scrutiny. Despite risk management being a central tenet in health policy in both the Southern and Northern Hemispheres of our world (Daemers et al., 2017; Mander and Murphy-Lawless, 2013; McIntyre et al., 2011; Miller and Shriver, 2012; Skinner, 2008), the precise meaning of risk within the contemporary maternity care setting is taken as a given and has rarely been subjected to sustained analysis (MacKenzie Bryers and van Teijlingen, 2010; Scamell and Alaszewski, 2012). Furthermore, as Lee (2017) has demonstrated, understandings of risk tend to be complicated by a false-consensus effect (Ross et al., 1977). Although maternity care professionals may believe that a common understanding of risk prevails across the multidisciplinary team, the consensus of opinion is in fact overestimated.
Making Heart Team Discussions Work
Published in Structural Heart, 2019
Michaela Kolbe, Bastian Grande, Adrian Marty, Robert Manka, Maurizio Taramasso, Fabian Nietlispach, Jose Luis Pomar, Francesco Maisano, Diana Reser
“Myth #7” is the belief that team leaders should involve themselves significantly in decision-making. Research has demonstrated that leadership style has a crucial impact on the decision-making process and decision quality: groups with directive (rather than participative) leaders more often make decisions consonant with that leader’s initial information.33 Also, team leaders may contribute to the lack of dissent by sending hierarchy triggers and discouraging others from speaking up.20 Biases in perception and cognition such as the “fundamental attribution error” (i.e. belief that people’s actions represent their inner qualities rather than situational pressures) and the “false consensus effect” (i.e. tendency to overestimate others’ agreement with us) can contribute to an illusion of knowing and shared agreement.34 Therefore, decision-making is improved when team leaders ask questions rather than give instructions and consider it part of their role to elicit expertise from the team by creating a psychologically safe atmosphere,17–19 initiate brief reflections on the team’s decision making,13,16 establish process rules to make sure that team members can share their unique expertise, and consider themselves as responsible for the decision-making process (but not necessarily outcome).
Backlash or a Positive Response?: Public Opinion of LGB Issues After Obergefell v. Hodges
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2018
Also of relevance to the current analyses is that researchers have identified the “false consensus effect” or the fact that people often perceive their own opinions as relatively common and perceive opposing opinions as relatively uncommon (Krueger & Clement, 1994; Ross, Green, & House, 1977; Wojcieszak & Price, 2009). For instance, Wojcieszak and Price (2009) analyzed public opinion on gun control, the death penalty, and teaching morality in public schools and found that as individuals’ support for these issues increased, so did their perception that the public supported these issues. Moreover, they found that “encountering dissimilar opinions mitigates the association between individual position and perceived public opinion on the three contentious sociopolitical issues” (p. 39). This finding in conjunction with the emphasis on communicative processes point to the fact that being in dialogue with people, particular with people who do not share the same beliefs as you, may lessen the tendency to conflate your opinion with the opinion of the general population. This literature points to the importance of asking questions about whether people are discussing same-sex marriage and gay rights issues (given the emphasis on communication in developing opinion about social issues) and how people perceive what the public’s opinion is on these issues (given the emphasis on the false consensus effect); it is from this literature that we have developed our second and third research questions and hypotheses.