Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change.

Pat Croskerry, Geeta Singhal, S��lvia Mamede
Author Information
  1. Pat Croskerry: Division of Medical Education, Dalhousie University, , Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Abstract

In a companion paper, we proposed that cognitive debiasing is a skill essential in developing sound clinical reasoning to mitigate the incidence of diagnostic failure. We reviewed the origins of cognitive biases and some proposed mechanisms for how debiasing processes might work. In this paper, we first outline a general schema of how cognitive change occurs and the constraints that may apply. We review a variety of individual factors, many of them biases themselves, which may be impediments to change. We then examine the major strategies that have been developed in the social sciences and in medicine to achieve cognitive and affective debiasing, including the important concept of forcing functions. The abundance and rich variety of approaches that exist in the literature and in individual clinical domains illustrate the difficulties inherent in achieving cognitive change, and also the need for such interventions. Ongoing cognitive debiasing is arguably the most important feature of the critical thinker and the well-calibrated mind. We outline three groups of suggested interventions going forward: educational strategies, workplace strategies and forcing functions. We stress the importance of ambient and contextual influences on the quality of individual decision making and the need to address factors known to impair calibration of the decision maker. We also emphasise the importance of introducing these concepts and corollary development of training in critical thinking in the undergraduate level in medical education.

Keywords

References

  1. N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 29;360(5):491-9 [PMID: 19144931]
  2. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Oct;22 Suppl 2:ii58-ii64 [PMID: 23882089]
  3. Acad Med. 2001 Mar;76(3):230-7 [PMID: 11242572]
  4. Acad Med. 2003 Aug;78(8):775-80 [PMID: 12915363]
  5. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Apr;62(4):707-32 [PMID: 18726822]
  6. BMJ Qual Saf. 2012 Jul;21(7):535-57 [PMID: 22543420]
  7. Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Jan;41(1):110-20 [PMID: 12514691]
  8. Med Teach. 2008 Jun;30(5):496-500 [PMID: 18576188]
  9. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006 Mar;63(3):267-72 [PMID: 16520431]
  10. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1987 Apr;52(4):700-9 [PMID: 3572733]
  11. Acad Med. 2010 Oct;85(10):1571-7 [PMID: 20881677]
  12. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Apr 26;108(17):6889-92 [PMID: 21482790]
  13. N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 28;355(26):2725-32 [PMID: 17192537]
  14. J Biomed Inform. 2011 Jun;44(3):402-12 [PMID: 20093196]
  15. Acad Emerg Med. 2007 Aug;14(8):743-9 [PMID: 17538077]
  16. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010 Jul-Aug;17(4):416-24 [PMID: 20595309]
  17. Teach Learn Med. 2011 Jan;23(1):78-84 [PMID: 21240788]
  18. JAMA. 2010 Sep 15;304(11):1198-203 [PMID: 20841533]
  19. Science. 1987 Oct 30;238(4827):625-31 [PMID: 3672116]
  20. J Clin Psychol. 1995 Nov;51(6):841-53 [PMID: 8778134]
  21. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2009 Jul;4(4):390-8 [PMID: 26158987]
  22. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2006 Apr 28;6:22 [PMID: 16646956]
  23. Acad Med. 2007 Oct;82(10 Suppl):S109-16 [PMID: 17895673]
  24. Acad Med. 1995 Aug;70(8):661 [PMID: 7646736]
  25. Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Oct;23(5):645-65; discussion 665-726 [PMID: 11301544]
  26. J Patient Saf. 2010 Dec;6(4):199-205 [PMID: 21500605]
  27. Semin Neurol. 1998;18(2):169-76 [PMID: 9608614]
  28. Psychol Bull. 1994 Jul;116(1):117-42 [PMID: 8078969]
  29. J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Aug;23(8):1261-8 [PMID: 18491194]
  30. Acad Med. 2011 Mar;86(3):307-13 [PMID: 21248608]
  31. Psychol Rev. 2004 Jul;111(3):781-99 [PMID: 15250784]
  32. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2010 May;10(2):208-16 [PMID: 20498345]
  33. Acad Med. 2004 May;79(5):438-46 [PMID: 15107283]
  34. Acad Med. 2009 Aug;84(8):1022-8 [PMID: 19638766]
  35. Am J Med. 2008 May;121(5 Suppl):S2-23 [PMID: 18440350]
  36. JAMA. 1987 Jul 3;258(1):67-74 [PMID: 3295316]
  37. Med Educ. 2008 May;42(5):468-75 [PMID: 18412886]
  38. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1996 Jan;1(3):221-6 [PMID: 24179022]
  39. Br J Anaesth. 2012 Feb;108(2):229-35 [PMID: 22157846]
  40. J Abnorm Psychol. 2009 Feb;118(1):89-99 [PMID: 19222317]
  41. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1984 Dec;47(6):1231-43 [PMID: 6527215]
  42. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009 Sep;14 Suppl 1:27-35 [PMID: 19669918]
  43. Am Psychol. 1992 Sep;47(9):1102-14 [PMID: 1329589]
  44. CJEM. 2014 Jan;16(1):13-9 [PMID: 24423996]
  45. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2013 Aug;18(3):343-63 [PMID: 22618855]
  46. Med Educ. 2007 Dec;41(12):1152-8 [PMID: 18045367]
  47. Healthc Q. 2009;12 Spec No Patient:e171-6 [PMID: 19667765]
  48. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007 Oct 11;:1085 [PMID: 18694183]

MeSH Term

Clinical Competence
Cognition
Decision Making
Diagnosis, Differential
Diagnostic Errors
Humans
Prejudice
Thinking

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0cognitivedebiasingchangestrategiesindividualpaperproposedclinicalbiasesoutlinemayvarietyfactorsimpedimentsimportantforcingfunctionsalsoneedinterventionscriticalimportancedecisionCognitivecompanionskillessentialdevelopingsoundreasoningmitigateincidencediagnosticfailurereviewedoriginsmechanismsprocessesmightworkfirstgeneralschemaoccursconstraintsapplyreviewmanyexaminemajordevelopedsocialsciencesmedicineachieveaffectiveincludingconceptabundancerichapproachesexistliteraturedomainsillustratedifficultiesinherentachievingOngoingarguablyfeaturethinkerwell-calibratedmindthreegroupssuggestedgoingforward:educationalworkplacestressambientcontextualinfluencesqualitymakingaddressknownimpaircalibrationmakeremphasiseintroducingconceptscorollarydevelopmenttrainingthinkingundergraduatelevelmedicaleducation2:BiasesDecisionMakingDiagnosticErrorsPatientSafety

Similar Articles

Cited By