IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v21y2001i5p376-381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Beguiling Pursuit of More Information

Author

Listed:
  • Donald A. Redelmeier

    (Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Clinical Epidemiology and Trauma Programs, Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada)

  • Eldar Shafir

    (Department of Psychology and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey)

  • Prince S. Aujla

    (Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada)

Abstract

Background. The authors tested whether clinicians make different decisions if they pursue information than if they receive the same information from the start. Methods. Three groups of clinicians participated (N = 1206): dialysis nurses (n = 171), practicing urologists (n = 461), and academic physicians (n = 574). Surveys were sent to each group containing medical scenarios formulated in 1 of 2 versions. The simple version of each scenario presented a choice between 2 options. The search version presented the same choice but only after some information had been missing and subsequently obtained. The 2 versions otherwise contained identical data and were randomly assigned. Results. In one scenario involving a personal choice about kidney donation, more dialysis nurses were willing to donate when they first decided to be tested for compatibility and were found suitable than when they knew they were suitable from the start (65% vs. 44% , P =0.007). Similar discrepancies were found in decisions made by practicing urologists concerning surgery for a patient with prostate cancer and in decisions of academic physicians considering emergency management for a patient with acute chest pain. Conclusions. The pursuit of information can increase its salience and cause clinicians to assign more importance to the information than if the same information was immediately available. An awareness of this cognitive bias may lead to improved decision making in difficult medical situations.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald A. Redelmeier & Eldar Shafir & Prince S. Aujla, 2001. "The Beguiling Pursuit of More Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(5), pages 376-381, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:5:p:376-381
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0102100504
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X0102100504?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ong, L. M. L. & de Haes, J. C. J. M. & Hoos, A. M. & Lammes, F. B., 1995. "Doctor-patient communication: A review of the literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 903-918, April.
    2. Baron, Jonathan & Beattie, Jane & Hershey, John C., 1988. "Heuristics and biases in diagnostic reasoning : II. Congruence, information, and certainty," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 88-110, August.
    3. Ubel, Peter A., 1999. "How stable are people's preferences for giving priority to severely ill patients?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(7), pages 895-903, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dai, Xianchi & Fishbach, Ayelet, 2013. "When waiting to choose increases patience," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 256-266.
    2. Jörn Sebastian Basel & Rolf Brühl, 2016. "Choice reversal in management decisions: the seductive force of new information," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(4), pages 343-359, May.
    3. Eliaz, Kfir & Schotter, Andrew, 2010. "Paying for confidence: An experimental study of the demand for non-instrumental information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 304-324, November.
    4. Eldar Shafir, 2003. "Context, conflict, weights, and identities: some psychological aspects of decision making," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    5. Jinkyung Choi, 2019. "The Association Between Health Conditions, Consciousness, Involvement, and Knowledge and Dietary Supplement Intake among University Students in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-12, October.
    6. Donald A. Redelmeier & Eldar Shafir, 2023. "The Fallacy of a Single Diagnosis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(2), pages 183-190, February.
    7. Ori Shen & Ron Rabinowitz & Ruth R. Geist & Eldar Shafir, 2010. "Effect of Background Case Characteristics on Decisions in the Delivery Room," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(4), pages 518-522, July.
    8. Luippold, Benjamin L. & Kida, Thomas & Piercey, M. David & Smith, James F., 2015. "Managing audits to manage earnings: The impact of diversions on an auditor’s detection of earnings management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-54.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miller, Nancy & Weinstein, Marcie, 2007. "Participation and knowledge related to a nursing home admission decision among a working age population," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 303-313, January.
    2. Beach, Wayne A. & Easter, David W. & Good, Jeffrey S. & Pigeron, Elisa, 2005. "Disclosing and responding to cancer "fears" during oncology interviews," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 893-910, February.
    3. Peter A. Ubel & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel, 2000. "Societal value, the person trade‐off, and the dilemma of whose values to measure for cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 127-136, March.
    4. Blume, Andreas, 2018. "Failure of common knowledge of language in common-interest communication games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 132-155.
    5. Colin Green & Karen Gerard, 2009. "Exploring the social value of health‐care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(8), pages 951-976, August.
    6. Rhona Hogg & Janet Hanley & Pam Smith, 2018. "Learning lessons from the analysis of patient complaints relating to staff attitudes, behaviour and communication, using the concept of emotional labour," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5-6), pages 1004-1012, March.
    7. Solomon, Josie & Knapp, Peter & Raynor, D.K. & Atkin, Karl, 2013. "Worlds apart? An exploration of prescribing and medicine-taking decisions by patients, GPs and local policy makers," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 264-272.
    8. Roscigno, Cecelia I. & Savage, Teresa A. & Grant, Gerald & Philipsen, Gerry, 2013. "How healthcare provider talk with parents of children following severe traumatic brain injury is perceived in early acute care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 32-39.
    9. Mæstad, Ottar & Norheim, Ole Frithjof, 2009. "Eliciting people's preferences for the distribution of health: A procedure for a more precise estimation of distributional weights," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 570-577, May.
    10. Shah, Koonal K., 2009. "Severity of illness and priority setting in healthcare: A review of the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 77-84, December.
    11. Udo Schneider, 2002. "Beidseitige Informationsasymmetrien in der Arzt-Patient-Beziehung: Implikationen für die GKV," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 71(4), pages 447-458.
    12. Mélanie Sustersic & Aurélie Gauchet & Anaïs Kernou & Charlotte Gibert & Alison Foote & Céline Vermorel & Jean-Luc Bosson, 2018. "A scale assessing doctor-patient communication in a context of acute conditions based on a systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Archontissa Maria Kanavaki & Courtney Jane Lightfoot & Jared Palmer & Thomas James Wilkinson & Alice Caroline Smith & Ceri Rhiannon Jones, 2021. "Kidney Care during COVID-19 in the UK: Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals on Impacts on Care Quality and Staff Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    15. Sjaak Molenaar & Mirjam A.G. Sprangers & Fenna C.E. Postma-Schuit & Emiel J. Th. Rutgers & Josje Noorlander & Joop Hendriks & Hanneke C.J.M. De Haes, 2000. "Interpretive Review : Feasibility and Effects of Decision Aids," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 20(1), pages 112-127, January.
    16. Marrero, Hipólito & Gámez, Elena & Díaz, José M., 2016. "Do people reason when they accept tricky offers? A case of approach and avoidance motivated reasoning," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 26-38.
    17. Bond, Samuel D. & Carlson, Kurt A. & Meloy, Margaret G. & Russo, J. Edward & Tanner, Robin J., 2007. "Information distortion in the evaluation of a single option," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 240-254, March.
    18. Jacobsson, Fredric & Carstensen, John & Borgquist, Lars, 2005. "Caring externalities in health economic evaluation: how are they related to severity of illness?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 172-182, August.
    19. Liz Morrell & Sarah Wordsworth & Sian Rees & Richard Barker, 2017. "Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(8), pages 793-804, August.
    20. Salvatore Nunnari & Giovanni Montari, 2019. "Audi Alteram Partem: An Experiment on Selective Exposure to Information," Working Papers 650, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:5:p:376-381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.