优化医学教育群体决策的12条建议:将天平向群体智慧“倾斜”,最大限度地减少群体思维。

IF 3.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Lea Harper, Omid Kiamanesh, Sylvain Coderre, Kenna Kelly-Turner, Melinda Davis, Kevin McLaughlin
{"title":"优化医学教育群体决策的12条建议:将天平向群体智慧“倾斜”,最大限度地减少群体思维。","authors":"Lea Harper, Omid Kiamanesh, Sylvain Coderre, Kenna Kelly-Turner, Melinda Davis, Kevin McLaughlin","doi":"10.1080/0142159X.2025.2488326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Group decision-making is now common in medical education, often used for decisions that are both complex and high stakes, such as determining whether to promote or remediate a trainee. In this context, it is often assumed that group decision making is superior to that of an individual, resulting in high quality decision outcomes through the pooling of collective knowledge and experience. Yet, while groups can outperform individuals, this is not guaranteed. In fact, groups are vulnerable to several cognitive biases and process issues that individuals are not subject to and these can lead to poor quality decision outcomes if not managed. As educational leaders who participate in group decision-making, we believe it is our responsibility to ensure the quality of these complex and high-stakes decisions. In this article, we discuss both the potential benefits and vulnerabilities of group decision-making by introducing the concepts of wisdom of the crowd and groupthink, respectively. With this foundation, we then offer twelve evidence-based tips that can be easily implemented in educational group decision-making to minimize groupthink and leverage the wisdom of the crowd.</p>","PeriodicalId":18643,"journal":{"name":"Medical Teacher","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Twelve tips to optimize group decision-making in medical education: 'Tipping' the scales toward wisdom of the crowd and minimizing groupthink.\",\"authors\":\"Lea Harper, Omid Kiamanesh, Sylvain Coderre, Kenna Kelly-Turner, Melinda Davis, Kevin McLaughlin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0142159X.2025.2488326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Group decision-making is now common in medical education, often used for decisions that are both complex and high stakes, such as determining whether to promote or remediate a trainee. In this context, it is often assumed that group decision making is superior to that of an individual, resulting in high quality decision outcomes through the pooling of collective knowledge and experience. Yet, while groups can outperform individuals, this is not guaranteed. In fact, groups are vulnerable to several cognitive biases and process issues that individuals are not subject to and these can lead to poor quality decision outcomes if not managed. As educational leaders who participate in group decision-making, we believe it is our responsibility to ensure the quality of these complex and high-stakes decisions. In this article, we discuss both the potential benefits and vulnerabilities of group decision-making by introducing the concepts of wisdom of the crowd and groupthink, respectively. With this foundation, we then offer twelve evidence-based tips that can be easily implemented in educational group decision-making to minimize groupthink and leverage the wisdom of the crowd.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Teacher\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Teacher\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2025.2488326\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2025.2488326","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

集体决策现在在医学教育中很常见,通常用于既复杂又高风险的决策,例如决定是提拔还是补偿实习生。在这种情况下,通常假设群体决策优于个人决策,通过汇集集体知识和经验产生高质量的决策结果。然而,虽然群体可以胜过个人,但这并不能保证。事实上,群体容易受到个人不受的认知偏见和过程问题的影响,如果不加以管理,这些问题可能导致低质量的决策结果。作为参与集体决策的教育领导者,我们相信确保这些复杂和高风险决策的质量是我们的责任。在本文中,我们分别通过引入群体智慧和群体思维的概念来讨论群体决策的潜在好处和脆弱性。在此基础上,我们提供了12个基于证据的建议,这些建议可以很容易地在教育群体决策中实施,以最大限度地减少群体思维,并利用群体的智慧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Twelve tips to optimize group decision-making in medical education: 'Tipping' the scales toward wisdom of the crowd and minimizing groupthink.

Group decision-making is now common in medical education, often used for decisions that are both complex and high stakes, such as determining whether to promote or remediate a trainee. In this context, it is often assumed that group decision making is superior to that of an individual, resulting in high quality decision outcomes through the pooling of collective knowledge and experience. Yet, while groups can outperform individuals, this is not guaranteed. In fact, groups are vulnerable to several cognitive biases and process issues that individuals are not subject to and these can lead to poor quality decision outcomes if not managed. As educational leaders who participate in group decision-making, we believe it is our responsibility to ensure the quality of these complex and high-stakes decisions. In this article, we discuss both the potential benefits and vulnerabilities of group decision-making by introducing the concepts of wisdom of the crowd and groupthink, respectively. With this foundation, we then offer twelve evidence-based tips that can be easily implemented in educational group decision-making to minimize groupthink and leverage the wisdom of the crowd.

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
Medical Teacher
Medical Teacher 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Teacher provides accounts of new teaching methods, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and serves as a forum for communication between medical teachers and those involved in general education. In particular, the journal recognizes the problems teachers have in keeping up-to-date with the developments in educational methods that lead to more effective teaching and learning at a time when the content of the curriculum—from medical procedures to policy changes in health care provision—is also changing. The journal features reports of innovation and research in medical education, case studies, survey articles, practical guidelines, reviews of current literature and book reviews. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
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