China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Adherence in Ethnic Minorities : The Case of South Asians in Britain
Published in Lynn B. Myers, Kenny Midence, Adherence to Treatment in Medical Conditions, 2020
Communication between doctor and patient is eased by more than vocabulary. Argyle’s (1972) social skill model has demonstrated that successful communication arises from each participant sharing an understanding of the meaning of non-verbal and extra-linguistic signals. Gumperz, Jupp and Roberts (1979) have shown how South Asian-English speakers can sound unintentionally hostile due to a different pattern of emphasis and tone from that used by English-English speakers. Such mismatches open the door to cultural misunderstanding and may go part of the way to explaining why some studies have found negative attitudes to Asian patients amongst GPs (Wright, 1983; Ahmad et al., 1991). Heatley and Yip (1991) have suggested that GPs’ perceptions of Asian patients as over-consulting relates to language and cultural barriers, and to Asians frequently presenting out of hours, “hence appearing to represent a disproportionately large share of the workload”. Such an observation is concordant with the psychological phenomenon of illusory correlation – i.e. the cognitive tendency for two behaviours or categories which are unusual to be regarded as causally connected by the perceiver (Hamilton and Gifford, 1976).
Violence Risk Analysis and Deception
Published in Harold V. Hall, Joseph G. Poirier, Detecting Malingering and Deception, 2020
Harold V. Hall, Joseph G. Poirier
First and second generation violence prediction studies isolated common errors in the assessment of dangerousness to include: (a) the lack of an adequate forensic database; (b) the frequent failure to account for retrospective and current distortion, both unintentional and intentional; (c) the prediction of future dangerousness in the absence of previous dangerousness; (d) the reliance on illusory correlations of dangerousness; (e) the prediction of dangerousness solely from clinical diagnosis; (f) the failure to consider triggering stimuli; (g) the failure to take into account opportunity variables; (h) the failure to evaluate inhibitory factors; (i) ignoring relevant base rates; and (j) the failure to formulate circumscribed conclusions capable of replication by independent evaluators.
Introduction
Published in Martin Lipscomb, Exploring Evidence-based Practice, 2015
In Chapter 10, John Paley describes the disputed and contentious place of qualitative research in the hierarchy of evidence, nurse education and, by implication, EBP. Like Bernie in Chapter 9, John recognises that EBP is seen by some as privileging quantitative ways of knowing and, again, this privileging has been considered ‘an arbitrary imposition’. John further notes that powerful voices in nursing have and are seeking to raise the status of qualitative research to match that accorded to quantitative work and, in this process, weaknesses (real and imagined) in quantitative experimental design are identified and emphasised. John, on the other hand, persuasively argues that, regardless of the stridency of calls favouring qualitative inquiry, it is unclear whether ‘qualitative evidence should be “on an equal footing” with evidence derived from quantitative and experimental designs’. Furthermore, insofar as statistical tests and experimental quantitative designs strive to limit the risk of inferential error, the absence of similar procedures and protocols in qualitative studies cannot but subvert claims regarding the status and use value of those findings. Indeed, unwelcome though the observation may be, it remains the case that, without such procedures and protocols, ‘there is no way of discriminating between legitimate inference in qualitative research and various forms of cognitive bias: observer expectancy effects, belief bias, illusory correlation, availability cascade, selective perception, congruence bias, motivated reasoning, or outright wishful thinking’. To understand how and why nursing has become attached to qualitative inquiry, John notes that for ‘the past thirty years, methodological discussion in qualitative health research … has been subordinated to the requirements of postgraduate study’. This subordination is important. It has imposed constraints on the methodologies and methods that are available to students and, thus, in order that studies can be completed by individuals with minimal resources in short time periods, postgraduate nursing researchers have found it expedient to undertake small sample interview-based studies, which limit themselves to retrospective descriptions of the participants’ experience and the ‘meaning’ they attach to experience. The philosophical justifications of this approach are, however, weak. And, in addition, the social psychology literature undermines the way in which ‘meaning’ is interpreted in most nursing qualitative studies. John’s argument raises serious and awkward questions that should, if given the attention they deserve, prompt fresh thinking among educators, researchers and the consumers (readers) of research.
Is Hindsight Really 20/20?: The Impact of Outcome Information on the Decision-Making Process
Published in International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 2018
Amanda Beltrani, Amanda L. Reed, Patricia A. Zapf, Randy K. Otto
Similarly, Zappala, Reed, Beltrani, Zapf, and Otto (2018) surveyed a sample of 80 forensic mental health professionals to assess for a bias blind spot. Participants completed a survey inquiring about four biases (illusory correlation, hindsight bias, fundamental attribution error, and confirmation bias) that occur in forensic evaluation. Using a 9-point Likert-type scale half the participants were requested to rate their own susceptibility to each bias whereas the other half were requested to rate their peers’ susceptibility to the same bias. These researchers found that a bias blind spot related to biases in general, and hindsight bias in particular, was evident in their sample of forensic evaluators.
Suicidal Ideation Severity in Transgender and Cisgender Elevated-Risk Military Service Members at Baseline and Three-Month Follow-Up
Published in Military Behavioral Health, 2020
Roshni Janakiraman, Ian H. Stanley, Mary E. Duffy, Anna R. Gai, Jetta E. Hanson, Peter M. Gutierrez, Thomas E. Joiner
Second, interpretations are limited by the use of different methods to collect and measure suicide risk and ideation at baseline and follow-up. At follow-up, participants either answered questions about suicidal ideation over the phone or in person, which could have affected disclosure. Unfortunately, we did not collect data on follow-up methodology, and therefore could not control for it in the current analyses. Further, as explained in the methods section, the use of different measures was necessary in the parent study that provided data for these secondary analyses. As such, we do not have a direct comparison measure to explore quantitative differences in suicide-related variables over time. This information would be useful in order to assess the change in suicidal ideation over time between cisgender and transgender participants. However, the use of different suicide measures at baseline and follow-up is also a study strength. Doing so reduces common-method variance, which can artificially inflate statistical relationships by creating covarying measurement error (Sharma et al., 2009). For example, using different measures to assess suicidal ideation reduces the likelihood that our findings are an artifact of participant response biases, such as illusory correlations and desirability effects (Buckner et al., 2012). Some may suggest the different findings at baseline and follow-up could be explained by sensitivity and specificity differences in the instruments. This argument would be compelling if the mean ASIQ scores in the two groups only differed by a few points, but the transgender participants’ mean score was above the clinical cutoff and the cisgender participants’ mean score was well below it. Therefore, it is unlikely that these findings are driven by differences in sensitivity/specificity of the instruments.
Myths and Conspiracies
Published in Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 2021
Grohol (2020) has proposed that people who strongly believe in conspiracy theories may qualify for a diagnosis of Conspiracy Theory Disorder (CTD). Taken from the research, he summarized the symptoms as (six or more needed for a diagnosis):Feeling anxious or fearful all the time, for no particular reasonInability to exert control (or feeling unable to control) the situationA need to make sense of complex topics or unrelated events, even with little or no topical expertise or knowledgeA strong urge to make connections between a series of unrelated events or behaviorsA belief in paranormal explanations for scientific phenomenonAn overreliance on cognitive shortcuts, such as illusory correlations, confirmation bias, and hindsight biasLow self-esteem and/or high self-uncertaintyA sense of not really belonging to any social group; isolation from othersA greater alienation, disengagement, or disaffection from societyA belief that the status-quo of society should be valued above all elseThe presence of the symptoms significantly impacts the person’s ability to function in their daily life activities, such as socializing with friends, going to work or school, or relationships with their family and others (Grohol, 2020).