首页> 外文期刊>Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges >The Causes of Errors in Clinical Reasoning: Cognitive Biases, Knowledge Deficits, and Dual Process Thinking
【24h】

The Causes of Errors in Clinical Reasoning: Cognitive Biases, Knowledge Deficits, and Dual Process Thinking

机译:临床推理中错误的原因:认知偏见,知识缺陷和双重过程思维

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Contemporary theories of clinical reasoning espouse a dual processing model, which consists of a rapid, intuitive component (Type 1) and a slower, logical and analytical component (Type 2). Although the general consensus is that this dual processing model is a valid representation of clinical reasoning, the causes of diagnostic errors remain unclear. Cognitive theories about human memory propose that such errors may arise from both Type 1 and Type 2 reasoning. Errors in Type 1 reasoning may be a consequence of the associative nature of memory, which can lead to cognitive biases. However, the literature indicates that, with increasing expertise (and knowledge), the likelihood of errors decreases. Errors in Type 2 reasoning may result from the limited capacity of working memory, which constrains computational processes. In this article, the authors review the medical literature to answer two substantial questions that arise from this work: (1) To what extent do diagnostic errors originate in Type 1 (intuitive) processes versus in Type 2 (analytical) processes? (2) To what extent are errors a consequence of cognitive biases versus a consequence of knowledge deficits?
机译:当代临床推理借助于双加工模型的当代理论,包括快速,直观的组件(1型)和较慢,逻辑和分析组件(类型2)。虽然普遍共识是,这种双加工模型是临床推理的有效表示,但诊断误差的原因仍不清楚。关于人记忆的认知理论提出,这种误差可能来自类型1和2型推理。 1型推理中的错误可能是内存联想性质的结果,这可能导致认知偏差。然而,文献表明,随着越来越多的专业知识(和知识),误差的可能性减少了。 2类型推理中的错误可能是由限制计算过程的有限的工作存储器的容量产生。在本文中,作者审查了医学文献,回答了从这项工作产生的两项大量问题:(1)诊断错误源于1型(直观)过程,在2型(分析)过程中? (2)在多大程度上是错误的认知偏见与知识赤字的结果的结果?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号