当常见的认知偏见影响述职谈话时。

IF 2.8 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Michael J Meguerdichian, Dana George Trottier, Kimberly Campbell-Taylor, Suzanne Bentley, Kellie Bryant, Michaela Kolbe, Vincent Grant, Adam Cheng
{"title":"当常见的认知偏见影响述职谈话时。","authors":"Michael J Meguerdichian, Dana George Trottier, Kimberly Campbell-Taylor, Suzanne Bentley, Kellie Bryant, Michaela Kolbe, Vincent Grant, Adam Cheng","doi":"10.1186/s41077-024-00324-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Healthcare debriefing is a cognitively demanding conversation after a simulation or clinical experience that promotes reflection, underpinned by psychological safety and attention to learner needs. The process of debriefing requires mental processing that engages both \"fast\" or unconscious thinking and \"slow\" intentional thinking to be able to navigate the conversation. \"Fast\" thinking has the potential to surface cognitive biases that impact reflection and may negatively influence debriefer behaviors, debriefing strategies, and debriefing foundations. As a result, negative cognitive biases risk undermining learning outcomes from debriefing conversations. As the use of healthcare simulation is expanding, the need for faculty development specific to the roles bias plays is imperative. In this article, we hope to build awareness about common cognitive biases that may present in debriefing conversations so debriefers have the chance to begin the hard work of identifying and attending to their potential detrimental impacts.</p>","PeriodicalId":72108,"journal":{"name":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","volume":"9 1","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656545/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When common cognitive biases impact debriefing conversations.\",\"authors\":\"Michael J Meguerdichian, Dana George Trottier, Kimberly Campbell-Taylor, Suzanne Bentley, Kellie Bryant, Michaela Kolbe, Vincent Grant, Adam Cheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41077-024-00324-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Healthcare debriefing is a cognitively demanding conversation after a simulation or clinical experience that promotes reflection, underpinned by psychological safety and attention to learner needs. The process of debriefing requires mental processing that engages both \\\"fast\\\" or unconscious thinking and \\\"slow\\\" intentional thinking to be able to navigate the conversation. \\\"Fast\\\" thinking has the potential to surface cognitive biases that impact reflection and may negatively influence debriefer behaviors, debriefing strategies, and debriefing foundations. As a result, negative cognitive biases risk undermining learning outcomes from debriefing conversations. As the use of healthcare simulation is expanding, the need for faculty development specific to the roles bias plays is imperative. In this article, we hope to build awareness about common cognitive biases that may present in debriefing conversations so debriefers have the chance to begin the hard work of identifying and attending to their potential detrimental impacts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in simulation (London, England)\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"48\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656545/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in simulation (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00324-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-024-00324-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医疗保健汇报是在模拟或临床经验后进行的认知要求对话,促进反思,以心理安全和关注学习者需求为基础。汇报过程需要心理处理,包括“快速”或无意识思维和“缓慢”的有意识思维,以便能够驾驭谈话。“快速”思维有可能使影响反思的认知偏见浮现出来,并可能对述职人员的行为、述职策略和述职基础产生负面影响。因此,消极的认知偏见可能会破坏汇报谈话的学习成果。随着医疗保健模拟的使用不断扩大,针对偏见所扮演角色的教师发展需求势在必行。在这篇文章中,我们希望建立对常见的认知偏见的认识,这些偏见可能会出现在述职谈话中,这样述职者就有机会开始艰难的工作,识别并关注它们潜在的有害影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When common cognitive biases impact debriefing conversations.

Healthcare debriefing is a cognitively demanding conversation after a simulation or clinical experience that promotes reflection, underpinned by psychological safety and attention to learner needs. The process of debriefing requires mental processing that engages both "fast" or unconscious thinking and "slow" intentional thinking to be able to navigate the conversation. "Fast" thinking has the potential to surface cognitive biases that impact reflection and may negatively influence debriefer behaviors, debriefing strategies, and debriefing foundations. As a result, negative cognitive biases risk undermining learning outcomes from debriefing conversations. As the use of healthcare simulation is expanding, the need for faculty development specific to the roles bias plays is imperative. In this article, we hope to build awareness about common cognitive biases that may present in debriefing conversations so debriefers have the chance to begin the hard work of identifying and attending to their potential detrimental impacts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信