探索学校心理学中的判断与决策:设定议程

IF 1.1 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Adelle K. Sturgell, Ethan R. Van Norman
{"title":"探索学校心理学中的判断与决策:设定议程","authors":"Adelle K. Sturgell, Ethan R. Van Norman","doi":"10.1080/15377903.2023.2221191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Problem-solving frameworks have the potential to promote objective data-based decisions that increase the likelihood students are matched to appropriate evidence-based interventions. Unfortunately, cognitive biases, heuristics, and fallacies can lead to erroneous conclusions within problem-solving frameworks. Some of these effects have been well-studied within special education and related fields, while the effects of lesser-known biases that have not garnered the same level of attention have been extensively investigated in fields like finance and medicine. Previous educational decision-making research has focused largely on special education evaluation processes. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we highlight lesser-known cognitive biases that may impact educational decision making. Second, we discuss how said biases can be researched within problem-solving frameworks and challenged in practice.","PeriodicalId":46345,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied School Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring Judgment and Decision-Making in School Psychology: Setting an Agenda\",\"authors\":\"Adelle K. Sturgell, Ethan R. Van Norman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15377903.2023.2221191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Problem-solving frameworks have the potential to promote objective data-based decisions that increase the likelihood students are matched to appropriate evidence-based interventions. Unfortunately, cognitive biases, heuristics, and fallacies can lead to erroneous conclusions within problem-solving frameworks. Some of these effects have been well-studied within special education and related fields, while the effects of lesser-known biases that have not garnered the same level of attention have been extensively investigated in fields like finance and medicine. Previous educational decision-making research has focused largely on special education evaluation processes. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we highlight lesser-known cognitive biases that may impact educational decision making. Second, we discuss how said biases can be researched within problem-solving frameworks and challenged in practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46345,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied School Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied School Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2023.2221191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2023.2221191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要问题解决框架有可能促进基于数据的客观决策,增加学生获得适当循证干预的可能性。不幸的是,在解决问题的框架内,认知偏见、启发法和谬论可能会导致错误的结论。其中一些影响在特殊教育和相关领域已经得到了很好的研究,而金融和医学等领域已经对鲜为人知的偏见的影响进行了广泛的研究。以往的教育决策研究主要集中在特殊教育评估过程上。本文的目的是双重的。首先,我们强调了可能影响教育决策的鲜为人知的认知偏见。其次,我们讨论了如何在解决问题的框架内研究上述偏见,并在实践中提出质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring Judgment and Decision-Making in School Psychology: Setting an Agenda
Abstract Problem-solving frameworks have the potential to promote objective data-based decisions that increase the likelihood students are matched to appropriate evidence-based interventions. Unfortunately, cognitive biases, heuristics, and fallacies can lead to erroneous conclusions within problem-solving frameworks. Some of these effects have been well-studied within special education and related fields, while the effects of lesser-known biases that have not garnered the same level of attention have been extensively investigated in fields like finance and medicine. Previous educational decision-making research has focused largely on special education evaluation processes. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, we highlight lesser-known cognitive biases that may impact educational decision making. Second, we discuss how said biases can be researched within problem-solving frameworks and challenged in practice.
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
Journal of Applied School Psychology
Journal of Applied School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: With a new publisher (Taylor & Francis) and a new editor (David L. Wodrich), the Journal of Applied School Psychology will continue to publish articles and periodic thematic issues in 2009. Each submission should rest on either solid theoretical or empirical support and provide information that can be used in applied school settings, related educational systems, or community locations in which practitioners work. Manuscripts appropriate for publication in the journal will reflect psychological applications that pertain to individual students, groups of students, teachers, parents, and administrators. The journal also seeks, over time, novel and creative ways in which to disseminate information about practically sound and empirically supported school psychology practice.
×
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