We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Debiasing affective forecasting errors with targeted, but not representative, experience narratives.
Patient Education and Counseling 2016 October
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether representative experience narratives (describing a range of possible experiences) or targeted experience narratives (targeting the direction of forecasting bias) can reduce affective forecasting errors, or errors in predictions of experiences.
METHODS: In Study 1, participants (N=366) were surveyed about their experiences with 10 common medical events. Those who had never experienced the event provided ratings of predicted discomfort and those who had experienced the event provided ratings of actual discomfort. Participants making predictions were randomly assigned to either the representative experience narrative condition or the control condition in which they made predictions without reading narratives. In Study 2, participants (N=196) were again surveyed about their experiences with these 10 medical events, but participants making predictions were randomly assigned to either the targeted experience narrative condition or the control condition.
RESULTS: Affective forecasting errors were observed in both studies. These forecasting errors were reduced with the use of targeted experience narratives (Study 2) but not representative experience narratives (Study 1).
CONCLUSION: Targeted, but not representative, narratives improved the accuracy of predicted discomfort.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Public collections of patient experiences should favor stories that target affective forecasting biases over stories representing the range of possible experiences.
METHODS: In Study 1, participants (N=366) were surveyed about their experiences with 10 common medical events. Those who had never experienced the event provided ratings of predicted discomfort and those who had experienced the event provided ratings of actual discomfort. Participants making predictions were randomly assigned to either the representative experience narrative condition or the control condition in which they made predictions without reading narratives. In Study 2, participants (N=196) were again surveyed about their experiences with these 10 medical events, but participants making predictions were randomly assigned to either the targeted experience narrative condition or the control condition.
RESULTS: Affective forecasting errors were observed in both studies. These forecasting errors were reduced with the use of targeted experience narratives (Study 2) but not representative experience narratives (Study 1).
CONCLUSION: Targeted, but not representative, narratives improved the accuracy of predicted discomfort.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Public collections of patient experiences should favor stories that target affective forecasting biases over stories representing the range of possible experiences.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app