Think! Evidence

Re-examining our bias against heuristics

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author McLaughlin, Kevin
dc.contributor.author Eva, Kevin W.
dc.contributor.author Norman, Geoff R.
dc.date.accessioned 2015-03-11T13:32:44Z
dc.date.available 2015-03-11T13:32:44Z
dc.date.issued 2014
dc.identifier.citation Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice
dc.identifier.issn 1573-1677
dc.identifier.uri http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9518-4
dc.identifier.uri http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/33
dc.description.abstract Using heuristics offers several cognitive advantages, such as increased speed and reduced effort when making decisions, in addition to allowing us to make decision in situations where missing data do not allow for formal reasoning. But the traditional view of heuristics is that they trade accuracy for efficiency. Here the authors discuss sources of bias in the literature implicating the use of heuristics in diagnostic error and highlight the fact that there are also data suggesting that under certain circumstances using heuristics may lead to better decisions that formal analysis. They suggest that diagnostic error is frequently misattributed to the use of heuristics and propose an alternative view whereby content knowledge is the root cause of diagnostic performance and heuristics lie on the causal pathway between knowledge and diagnostic error or success.
dc.subject Heuristics and biases
dc.title Re-examining our bias against heuristics
dc.type Article


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Think! Evidence


Browse

My Account