SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Utökad sökning

onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:su-206843"
 

Sökning: onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:su-206843" > Cognitive bias and ...

Cognitive bias and attitude distortion of a priority decision

Svenson, Ola, 1939- (författare)
Stockholms universitet,Kognitiv psykologi,Decision Research, USA
Lindholm Öjmyr, Torun, 1962- (författare)
Stockholms universitet,Personlighets-, social- och utvecklingspsykologi
Appelbom, Sophia (författare)
Karolinska Institutet
visa fler...
Isohanni, Freja, 1987- (författare)
Stockholms universitet,Personlighets-, social- och utvecklingspsykologi
visa färre...
 (creator_code:org_t)
2022-06-08
2022
Engelska.
Ingår i: Cognitive Processing. - : Springer Nature. - 1612-4782 .- 1612-4790. ; 23:3, s. 379-391
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
Abstract Ämnesord
Stäng  
  • The resource saving bias is a cognitive bias describing how resource savings from improvements of high-productivity units are overestimated compared to improvements of less productive units. Motivational reasoning describes how attitudes, here towards private/public health care, distort decisions based on numerical facts. Participants made a choice between two productivity increase options with the goal of saving doctor resources. The options described productivity increases in low-/high-productivity private/public emergency rooms. Jointly, the biases produced 78% incorrect decisions. The cognitive bias was stronger than the motivational bias. Verbal justifications of the decisions revealed elaborations of the problem beyond the information provided, biased integration of quantitative information, change of goal of decision, and motivational attitude biases. Most (83%) of the incorrect decisions were based on (incorrect) mathematical justifications illustrating the resource saving bias. Participants who had better scores on a cognitive test made poorer decisions. Women who gave qualitative justifications to a greater extent than men made more correct decision. After a first decision, participants were informed about the correct decision with a mathematical explanation. Only 6.3% of the participants corrected their decisions after information illustrating facts resistance. This could be explained by psychological sunk cost and coherence theories. Those who made the wrong choice remembered the facts of the problem better than those who made a correct choice. 

Ämnesord

SAMHÄLLSVETENSKAP  -- Psykologi (hsv//swe)
SOCIAL SCIENCES  -- Psychology (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

motivated reasoning
cognitive bias
time saving bias
planning policy
medical efficiency
psykologi
Psychology

Publikations- och innehållstyp

ref (ämneskategori)
art (ämneskategori)

Hitta via bibliotek

Till lärosätets databas

Sök utanför SwePub

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy