The Cognitive Imperative Thinking about How We Think
Open Access
- 1 November 2000
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in Academic Emergency Medicine
- Vol. 7 (11) , 1223-1231
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb00467.x
Abstract
There are three domains of expertise required for consistently effective performance in emergency medicine (EM): procedural, affective, and cognitive. Most of the activity is performed in the cognitive domain. Studies in the cognitive sciences have focused on a number of common and predictable biases in the thinking process, many of which are relevant to the practice of EM. It is important to understand these biases and how they might influence clinical decision‐making behavior. Among the specialities, EM provides a unique clinical milieu of inconstancy, uncertainty, variety, and complexity. Injury and illness are seen within narrow time windows, often under pressured ambient conditions. These operating characteristics force practitioners to adopt a distinctive blend of thinking strategies. Principal among them is the use of heuristics, a form of abbreviated thinking that often leads to successful outcomes but that occasionally may result in error. A number of opportunities exist to overcome interdisciplinary, linguistic, and other historical obstacles to develop a sound approach to understanding how we think in EM. This will lead to a better awareness of our cognitive processes, an improved capacity to teach effectively about cognitive strategies, and, ultimately, the minimization or avoidance of clinical error.Keywords
This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Potential for Improved Teamwork to Reduce Medical Errors in the Emergency DepartmentAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1999
- Pertinence generation in radiological diagnosis: Spreading activation and the nature of expertiseCognitive Science, 1998
- Pertinence Generation in Radiological Diagnosis: Spreading Activation and the Nature of ExpertiseCognitive Science, 1998
- A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuriesAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1992
- Ergonomic and Human Factors Affecting Anesthetic Vigilance and Monitoring Performance in the Operating Room EnvironmentAnesthesiology, 1990
- Outcome bias in decision evaluation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988
- Outcome bias in decision evaluation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988
- The 'chagrin factor' and qualitative decision analysisArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1985
- Hindsight is not equal to foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1975
- Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and BiasesScience, 1974