Top

GZ - Psychologie

Gepubliceerd in:

01-12-2014 | Wetenschap

Heuristieken, vertekeningen en het klinisch-diagnostische proces

Debiasing strategieën

Auteurs: J. Fenneman, Prof. dr. C. Witteman

Gepubliceerd in: GZ - Psychologie | Uitgave 8/2014

Samenvatting

In de klinische praktijk wordt veel geoordeeld en beslist over en voor cliënten. Om dat ondanks de tijdsdruk te kunnen doen, gebruiken clinici heuristieken, die mogelijk tot vertekeningen leiden. In een vorige bijdrage werden de vier belangrijkste heuristieken en de consequenties van hun gebruik besproken. Omdat men niet zonder deze heuristieken tot een beslissing kan komen, wordt in de huidige bijdrage een overzicht gegeven van vier debiasing strategieën om de negatieve gevolgen van dit gebruik te voorkomen of te mitigeren.

vorige artikel ‘We zijn winnaars op de lange termijn’

volgende artikel Veel liefs van jullie dochter

Arkes, H.R. (1981). Impediments to accurate clinical judgment and possible ways to minimize their impact. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 323–330.CrossRefPubMed

Arkes, H. R. (1991). Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 486–498.CrossRef

Arkes, H. R., Faust, D., Guilmette, T. J., & Hart, K. (1988). Eliminating the hindsight bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 305–307.CrossRef

Arkes, H. R., & Harkness, A. R. (1980). Effect of making a diagnosis on subsequent recognition of symptoms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 568–575.

Baron, J. (2008). Thinking and deciding (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Bell, I., & Mellor, D. (2009). Clinical judgments: Research and practice. Australian Psychologist, 44, 112–121.CrossRef

Croskerry, P. (2003) The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Academic Medicine, 78, 775–780.CrossRefPubMed

Croskerry, P., Singhal, G., & Mamede, S. (2013a). Cognitive debiasing 1: origins of bias and theory of debiasing. BMJ quality & safety, 22, ii58–ii64.

Croskerry, P., Singhal, G., & Mamede, S. (2013b). Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change. BMJ quality & safety, 22, ii65–ii72.

Dawes, R. M. (1986). Representative thinking in clinical judgment. Clinical Psychology Review, 6, 424–441.CrossRef

Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science, 243, 1668–1674.CrossRefPubMed

Eddy, D. M. (1982). Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 249–267). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Elstein, A. S. (2009). Thinking about diagnostic thinking: a 30-year perspective. Advances in health sciences education, 14, 7–18.

Fischhoff, B. (1982). Debiasing. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 422–444). Cambridge University PressCrossRef

Furnham, A., & Boo, H. C. (2011). A literature review of the anchoring effect. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40, 35–42.CrossRef

Galanter, C. A., & Patel, V. L. (2005). Medical decision making: a selective review for child psychiatrists and psychologists. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 675–689.CrossRefPubMed

Garb, H. N. (1998). Studying the clinician: Judgment research and psychological assessment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRef

Garb, H.N. (2005). Clinical judgment and decision making. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 67–89.CrossRefPubMed

Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological review, 102, 684–704.

Goldberg, L. R. (1965). Diagnosticians vs. diagnostic signs: The diagnosis of psychosis vs. neurosis from the MMPI. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 79, 1–28.

Goldberg, L. R. (1968). Simple models or simple processes? Some research on clinical judgments. American Psychologist, 23, 483–496.CrossRefPubMed

Goldberg, L. R. (1970). Man versus model of man: A rationale, plus some evidence, for a method of improving on clinical inferences. Psychological bulletin, 73, 422–432.

Graber, M. L., Kissam, S., Payne, V. L., Meyer, A. N., Sorensen, A., Lenfestey, N., & Singh, H. (2012). Cognitive interventions to reduce diagnostic error: a narrative review. BMJ Quality & Safety, 21, 535–557.CrossRef

Hirt, E. R., & Markman, K. D. (1995). Multiple explanation: A consider-analternative strategy for debiasing judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1069–1086.CrossRef

Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 107–118.

Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Preston, E. (1984). Considering the opposite: a corrective strategy for social judgment. Journal of personality and social psychology, 47, 1231–1243.

Meehl, P.E. (1954). Clinical versus Statistical Prediction: A Theoretical analysis and review of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). How can decision making be improved?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 379–383.

Mumma, G. H., & Wilson, S. B. (1995). Procedural debiasing of primacy/anchoring effects in linical-like judgments. Journal of clinical psychology, 51, 841–853.

Mussweiler, T., Strack, F., & Pfeiffer, T. (2000). Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1142–1150.CrossRef

Pfeiffer, A.M., Whelan, J.P., & Martin, J.M. (2000). Decision-making bias in psychotherapy: Effects of hypothesis source and accountability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 429–436.CrossRef

Rueter, M. A., Chao, W., & Conger, R. D. (2000). The effect of systematic variation in retrospective conduct disorder reports on antisocial personality disorder diagnoses. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 68, 307–312.

Wedding, D., & Faust, D. (1989). Clinical judgment and decision making in neuropsychology. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 4, 233–265.CrossRefPubMed

Westenberg, M., & P. Koele (1993) Klinische besliskunde. In P. Koele en J. van der Pligt (red.). Beslissen en beoordelen (pp. 346-373). Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom,.

Wilson, T. D., & Brekke, N. (1994). Mental contamination and mental correction: unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. Psychological bulletin, 116, 117–142.

Titel: Heuristieken, vertekeningen en het klinisch-diagnostische proces
Debiasing strategieën
Auteurs: J. Fenneman
Prof. dr. C. Witteman
Publicatiedatum: 01-12-2014
Uitgeverij: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Gepubliceerd in: GZ - Psychologie / Uitgave 8/2014
Print ISSN: 1879-5080
Elektronisch ISSN: 1879-5099
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41480-014-0070-x

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Samenvatting

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 8/2014

De universiteit van de toekomst

Veel liefs van jullie dochter

Nieuws

‘EMDR lijkt erg op de Aboriginal-manier van traumaverwerking’

MH17 in mijn spreekkamer

‘We zijn winnaars op de lange termijn’