IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v30y2010i4p518-522.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Background Case Characteristics on Decisions in the Delivery Room

Author

Listed:
  • Ori Shen

    (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Affiliated with Ben Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel, orishen@netvision.net.il)

  • Ron Rabinowitz

    (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Affiliated with Ben Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel)

  • Ruth R. Geist

    (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Affiliated with Ben Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel)

  • Eldar Shafir

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

Abstract

Background. The authors investigated whether obstetricians make different decisions about a medical test case depending on the characteristics of background cases that preceded the test case. Methods. Five hypothetical cases were sent to 1247 obstetricians. The outcome of interest was the proportion of physicians who elect to perform a cesarean on a borderline test case, presented with 4 background cases. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 conditions: 1) pathological background, in which the test case was preceded by abnormal cases, typically requiring cesarean; 2) physiological background, where the test case was preceded by relatively uncomplicated cases, often suggesting a less invasive treatment; and 3) control, where the test case appeared first. Results. A significantly higher proportion of respondents chose a cesarean when the test case was preceded by physiological cases (75.4%) than when it was preceded by pathological cases (52.2%). This tendency was observed among those actively and not actively involved in obstetrics and in physicians with different levels of training. Conclusions. A patient’s chances of undergoing cesarean section can be influenced by the immediately prior experience of the physician. This study with hypothetical vignettes found that background cases can influence physicians’ decisions. The test case was apparently perceived as more grave when it followed uncomplicated cases as compared to when it was preceded by abnormal cases. Such inconsistencies in decision making are unlikely to be fully resolved by expertise, as suggested by the lack of differences between physicians with different training levels. An understanding of such effects may contribute to more informed consideration of unappreciated influences in making decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:30:y:2010:i:4:p:518-522
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X09353451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X09353451
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X09353451?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. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Donald A. Redelmeier & Eldar Shafir, 2023. "The Fallacy of a Single Diagnosis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(2), pages 183-190, February.
    3. 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.
    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. Dai, Xianchi & Fishbach, Ayelet, 2013. "When waiting to choose increases patience," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 256-266.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.

    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:30:y:2010:i:4:p:518-522. 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.