A matter of perspective

Choosing for others differs from choosing for yourself in making treatment decisions
  • Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
  • Brianna Sarr
  • Angela Fagerlin
  • Peter A. Ubel
Original Articles

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many people display omission bias in medical decision making, accepting the risk of passive nonintervention rather than actively choosing interventions (such as vaccinations) that result in lower levels of risk.

OBJECTIVE: Testing whether people’s preferences for active interventions would increase when deciding for others versus for themselves.

RESEARCH DESIGN: Survey participants imagined themselves in 1 of 4 roles: patient, physician treating a single patient, medical director creating treatment guidelines, or parent deciding for a child. All read 2 short scenarios about vaccinations for a deadly flu and treatments for a slow-growing cancer.

PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand three hundred and ninety-nine people drawn from a demographically stratified internet sample.

MEASURES: Chosen or recommended treatments. We also measured participants’ emotional response to our task.

RESULTS: Preferences for risk-reducing active treatments were significantly stronger for participants imagining themselves as medical professionals than for those imagining themselves as patients (vaccination: 73% [physician] & 63% [medical director] vs 48% [patient], Ps<.001; chemotherapy: 68% & 68% vs 60%, Ps<.012). Similar results were observed for the parental role (vaccination: 57% vs 48%, P=.003; chemotherapy: 72% vs 60%, P<.001). Reported emotional reactions were stronger in the responsible medical professional and parental roles yet were also independently associated with treatment choice, with higher scores associated with reduced omission tendencies (OR=1.15 for both regressions, Ps<.01).

CONCLUSIONS: Treatment preferences may be substantially influenced by a decision-making role. As certain roles appear to reinforce “big picture” thinking about difficult risk tradeoffs, physicians and patients should consider re-framing treatment decisions to gain new, and hopefully beneficial, perspectives.

Key words

decision making risk communication omission bias 

References

  1. 1.
    Ritov I, Baron J. Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. J Behav Decis Making. 1990;3:263–77.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spranca M, Minsk E, Baron J. Omission and commission in judgment and choice. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1991;27:76–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Asch DA, Baron J, Hershey JC, et al. Omission bias and pertussis vaccination. Med Decis Making. 1994;14:118–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Meszaros JR, Asch DA, Baron J, Hershey JC, Kunreuther H, Schwartz-Buzaglo J. Cognitive processes and the decisions of some parents to forego pertussis vaccination for their children. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:697–703.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baron J, Ritov I. Omission bias, individual differences, and normality. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2004;94:74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haidt J, Baron J. Social roles and the moral judgment of acts and omissions. Eur J Soc Psychol. 1996;26:201–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001;127:267–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kray L, Gonzalez R. Differential weighting in choice versus advice: I’ll do this, you do that. J Behav Decis Making. 1999;12:207–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jonas E, Schulz-Hardt S, Frey D. Giving advice or making decisions in someone else’s place: the influence of impression, defense, and accuracy motivation on the search for new information. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2005;31:977–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Demoratz MJ. Advance directives: getting patients to complete them before they need them. Case Manager. 2005;16:61–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lantos J. Informed consent. The whole truth for patients?. Cancer. 1993;72(suppl 9):2811–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kurzon N. A poker player’s guide to beating cancer. Newsweek 2004, January 19, 2004: 12.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Asch DA, Hershey JC. Why some health policies don’t make sense at the bedside. Ann Intern Med. 1995;122:846–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chant AD. Practising doctors should not manage. Lancet. 1984;1:1398.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wroe AL, Turner N, Salkovskis PM. Understanding and predicting parental decisions about early childhood immunizations. Health Psychol. 2004;23:33–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wroe AL, Bhan A, Salkovskis P, Bedford H. Feeling bad about immunising our children. Vaccine. 2005;23:1428–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;54:1063–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carstensen LL, Isaacowitz DM, Charles CT. Taking time seriously: a theory of socioemotional selectivity. Am Psychol. 1999;54:165–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Charles S, Mather M, Carstensen LL. Aging and emotional memory: the forgettable nature of negative images for older adults. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2003;132:310–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG, Slovic P. The bearable lightness of aging: judgment and decision processes in older adults. In: Stern PC, Carstensen LL, eds. The Aging Mind: Opportunities in Cognitive Research. Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press; 2000:144–65.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Williams P, Drolet A. Age-related differences in responses to emotional advertisements. J Consum Res. 2005;32:343–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kray LJ. Contingent weighting in self-other decision making. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2000;83:82–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Connolly T, Zeelenberg M. Regret in decision making. Psychol Sci. 2004;11:212–6.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Raymark P. Accepting or rejecting medical treatment: a comparison of decisions made for self versus those made for a significant other. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2000;30:2409–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ubel PA. “What should I do, doc?”: some psychologic benefits of physician recommendations. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:977–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Hershey JC, Ubel PA. The role of physicians recommendations in medical treatment decisions. Med Decis Making. 2002;22:262–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McNutt RA. Shared medical decision making: problems, process, progress. JAMA. 2004;292:2516–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schneider CE. The Practice of Autonomy: Patients, Doctors, and Medical Decisions. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
    • 1
    • 4
    • 2
  • Brianna Sarr
    • 4
    • 2
  • Angela Fagerlin
    • 1
    • 4
    • 2
  • Peter A. Ubel
    • 1
    • 4
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.VA Health Services Research & Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes ResearchVA Ann Arbor Healthcare SystemAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Division of General Internal MedicineUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.Center for Behavioral and Decision Sciences in MedicineAnn Arbor

Personalised recommendations