China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Making moral decisions
Published in Ira Bedzow, Giving Voice to Values as a Professional Physician, 2018
After you have identified your gut reaction, you will start to consider why you had that reaction. People are often unaware of their biases or the impact their biases may have on their attitudes or their decision-making; therefore, making yourself aware of your biases will help to ensure that your choices and actions are in line with the values you want to voice. We will not go through all the potential biases here; rather, we will go through three which have the greatest effect on moral perception in group and healthcare settings, namely, the conformity bias, obedience to authority, and the framing bias. Conformity bias and obedience to authority are particularly important, since healthcare is very hierarchical yet also collaborative, and it is sometimes a challenge to know when we are letting the tide take us versus when we must be open to learning from others’ perspectives. Similarly, in recognizing the framing bias we become aware of how we and others limit possible good choices when we refuse to see situations through various different perspectives.
Effects of graphic presentation on understanding medical risks and benefits among Japanese adults
Published in Cogent Medicine, 2021
Hitomi Danya, Yuki Yonekura, Kazuhiro Nakayama
We chose the three-item Schwartz scale because Japanese participants’ performance on that scale was much higher than that of the participants in the original study conducted in the United States (80% average item-wise correct response rate for the Schwartz-J and 87% for the Lipkus-J) (Lipkus et al., 2001; Okamoto et al., 2012). For almost all items in the Lipkus-J, Japanese showed a correct answer rate of 90% or more. Moreover, health numeracy was still associated with framing bias with individuals with a Lipkus-J performance below the median; it was significantly influenced by how probability was framed when they rated surgical risk. A significant association was also found using the Schwartz-J (Okamoto et al., 2012). After consulting the developers of the Schwartz-J and Lipkus-J about these results, we chose to use the Schwartz-J.
Bilingualism and COVID-19: using a second language during a health crisis
Published in Journal of Communication in Healthcare, 2021
Scott R. Schroeder, Peiyao Chen
Humans are susceptible to cognitive biases, and such irrational thinking can have adverse effects in a health crisis. For example, irrational thinking could lead some people to believe that COVID-19 is a hoax and thus could make them less inclined to engage in social distancing, hand washing, and mask wearing. However, the use of an L2 can reduce cognitive biases, particularly in emotionally-laden contexts (for reviews, see 54,55). Relevant to COVID-19, L2 use appears to reduce several cognitive biases that are related to health, including the framing bias, the optimism bias, the causality bias, and superstitious thinking. These biases are now reviewed in turn.
Postponed Withholding Does Not Postpone Attachment
Published in The American Journal of Bioethics, 2022
Numerous studies have demonstrated the impact of framing bias (Haward, Murphy, and Lorenz 2008), the order in which outcomes are presented (e.g., survival v. disability) (McDonnell et al. 2021), and how using a default option (Haward, Murphy, and Lorenz 2012) may all result in bias and less than autonomous parental decision-making. Clinical experience, and at least a few studies, tell us that when asked, parents in these situations almost uniformly opt for resuscitation and the initiation of intensive care, and value it (Arnolds et al. 2018).