Factors influencing health practitioners’ cognitive processing and decision-making style
View/ Open
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Parker-Tomlin, Michelle
Boschen, Mark
Glendon, Ian
Morrissey, Shirley
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2019
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Successful interventions, healthcare planning, and patient-centered care require explanation, justification, and collaboration through interprofessional clinical decision-making (CDM). Understanding health practitioners’ decision-making styles and influencing factors can enhance CDM capabilities. Health professionals and students (N = 229) completed an online survey on their decision-making styles, interprofessional education, interprofessional practice, discipline education, clinical experience, processing styles, personality, interpersonal motivational factors, and age. To assess the influence of task structure, participants ...
View more >Successful interventions, healthcare planning, and patient-centered care require explanation, justification, and collaboration through interprofessional clinical decision-making (CDM). Understanding health practitioners’ decision-making styles and influencing factors can enhance CDM capabilities. Health professionals and students (N = 229) completed an online survey on their decision-making styles, interprofessional education, interprofessional practice, discipline education, clinical experience, processing styles, personality, interpersonal motivational factors, and age. To assess the influence of task structure, participants answered CDM questions on a high- and a low-structured case study. Age demonstrated an effect on the level of clinical experience, while clinical experience also mediated the effect of age on rational processing styles. While personality results were mixed, consistent with previous findings, conscientiousness predicted rational processing style. Effects of interpersonal motivation on personality were also mixed, insofar as results indicated an association between conscientiousness and both experiential and rational processing styles. Interpersonal motivation also predicted rational processing styles. The complexity of CDM and factors influencing healthcare practitioners’ processing and decision-making styles was highlighted. To optimize CDM processes by addressing errors and biases, CDM, and practice complexity, healthcare practitioner education should include theory-driven CDM orientation frameworks.
View less >
View more >Successful interventions, healthcare planning, and patient-centered care require explanation, justification, and collaboration through interprofessional clinical decision-making (CDM). Understanding health practitioners’ decision-making styles and influencing factors can enhance CDM capabilities. Health professionals and students (N = 229) completed an online survey on their decision-making styles, interprofessional education, interprofessional practice, discipline education, clinical experience, processing styles, personality, interpersonal motivational factors, and age. To assess the influence of task structure, participants answered CDM questions on a high- and a low-structured case study. Age demonstrated an effect on the level of clinical experience, while clinical experience also mediated the effect of age on rational processing styles. While personality results were mixed, consistent with previous findings, conscientiousness predicted rational processing style. Effects of interpersonal motivation on personality were also mixed, insofar as results indicated an association between conscientiousness and both experiential and rational processing styles. Interpersonal motivation also predicted rational processing styles. The complexity of CDM and factors influencing healthcare practitioners’ processing and decision-making styles was highlighted. To optimize CDM processes by addressing errors and biases, CDM, and practice complexity, healthcare practitioner education should include theory-driven CDM orientation frameworks.
View less >
Journal Title
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Copyright Statement
© 2018 Taylor & Francis. This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Interprofessional Care on 29 Nov 2018, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2018.1551866
Note
This publication has been entered into Griffith Research Online as an Advanced Online Version.
Subject
Health services and systems
Public health