Abstract
This study investigates the behavioural uses of informational cues in clinical decision making. A sample of experienced physicians was asked to assign probabilities for accepting a given diagnosis on the basis of case profiles. Judgement processes of individuals were modeled. The investigation focused upon the selective use and value of cues in the diagnostic process with a special focus upon the impact of redundant information on judgements. Results suggest that decision makers do respond to cues selectively; even, at times drawing inconsistent inferences from different subsets of cues containing the same information. The study imples that information system designs should explictly take account of variations in the individual information structures of users (or perhaps, users should be trained to conform in their behavior to the theory(!)).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Birnbaum, M.H., (1973). “The devil rides again: correlation as an index of fit”. Psych. Bull., 79, 239–242.
Birnbaum, M.H. (1974). “Reply to the devil’s advocates: don ‘t confound model testing and measurement”. Psych. Bull., 81, 854–859.
Dawes, R.M. (1971). “A case study of graduate admissions: Application of three principles of human decision making”. American Psychologist, 26, 180–188.
Einhorn, H.J. (1970). “The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making”. Psych. Bull. 73, 221–230.
Einhorn, H.J. (1971). “Use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models as a function of task and amount of information”. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 6, 1–27.
Green, P.E. and F.J. Carmone (1974), “Evaluation of multi-attribute alternatives: additive versus configural utility measurement. Decision Sciences, 5, 164–181.
Goldberg, L.R., (1971). “Five models of clinical judgement: An empirical comparison between linear and nonlinear representations of the human inference process!’ Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 6, 458–479.
Hoffman, P.J. (1960), “The paramorphic representation of clinical judgement. Psych. Bull. 47, 116–131.
Hoffman, P.J., P. Slovic, and L.G. Rorer (1968), “An analysis of variance model for the assessment of configural cue utilization in clinical judgement:’ Psych. Bull. 69, 338–349.
Kort F., (1968), “A nonlinear model for the analysis of judicial decisions”. The American Political Science Review 62, 546–555.
Slovic, P., (1966). “Cue consistency and cue utilization in judgement”. American Journal of Psychology 79, 427–434.
Slovic, P. and S. Lichtenstein (1971). “Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing judgement”. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance 6, 649–744.
Vertinsky, I. (1972). “Methodology of Simulation and Experimentation for Social Planning”, in Experimentation and Simulation in Political Science, Lapona and Smoker (eds.), U. of Toronto Press, 1972, 409–448.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1976 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Schwartz, S.L., Vertinsky, I., Ziemba, W.T., Bernstein, M. (1976). Some Behavioural Aspects of Information Use in Decision Making: A Study of Clinical Judgements. In: Thiriez, H., Zionts, S. (eds) Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol 130. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-87563-2_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-87563-2_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-07794-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-87563-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive