Evidence of anchoring bias in novice (first year) osteopathic French students in the context of the primary respiratory mechanism: A randomized-experimental study
Clara Driaï-Allègre , Fanny Coste , Clara Olmière , Marilyne Grinand , Aymeric Le Nohaïc , François Romanet , Géraud Gourjon
{"title":"Evidence of anchoring bias in novice (first year) osteopathic French students in the context of the primary respiratory mechanism: A randomized-experimental study","authors":"Clara Driaï-Allègre , Fanny Coste , Clara Olmière , Marilyne Grinand , Aymeric Le Nohaïc , François Romanet , Géraud Gourjon","doi":"10.1016/j.ijosm.2024.100717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Cognitive biases appear to be one of the most common causes of incorrect medical diagnosis. It affects students during their training and could persist after post-graduation. This could deteriorate patient care. Among them, anchoring bias can impair haptic perception and lead to a biased diagnosis.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Our study assessed the anchoring bias of first-year osteopathic students by determining whether information regarding the PRM rhythm could influence their haptic perception.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Forty first-year osteopathic students were randomly assigned to three groups. They were given different anchoring values during a PRM rhythm evaluation (3, 10 or 17 movements per minute, mpm). All information were given through video documents. Perceived rhythms were collected before and after anchoring. Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare intra and intergroup values.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Before receiving the anchor, groups significantly (p = 0.105) perceived the same rhythms (11.8 ± 6.6mpm; 20.9 ± 9.9mpm; 18.2 ± 10.6mpm; respectively) with high variance among students. After receiving the anchor, students perceived significantly different rhythms; 3.5 ± 1.7mpm; 11.4 ± 2.8mpm; 16.8 ± 6.6mpm, respectively (p < 0.0001). Variance decreased significantly.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>An anchoring bias might occur among first-year osteopathic students regarding their perception of the PRM rhythm. These results provide insights into the importance of the way of presenting information to students, especially controversial ones. Indeed, the way in which changing the ontological framework can modify the epistemological approach needs to be investigated. This could have implications on a student's clinical diagnosis. Students are encouraged to believe in their haptic ability, but also to use critical thinking.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51068,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068924000105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Cognitive biases appear to be one of the most common causes of incorrect medical diagnosis. It affects students during their training and could persist after post-graduation. This could deteriorate patient care. Among them, anchoring bias can impair haptic perception and lead to a biased diagnosis.
Objective
Our study assessed the anchoring bias of first-year osteopathic students by determining whether information regarding the PRM rhythm could influence their haptic perception.
Methods
Forty first-year osteopathic students were randomly assigned to three groups. They were given different anchoring values during a PRM rhythm evaluation (3, 10 or 17 movements per minute, mpm). All information were given through video documents. Perceived rhythms were collected before and after anchoring. Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare intra and intergroup values.
Results
Before receiving the anchor, groups significantly (p = 0.105) perceived the same rhythms (11.8 ± 6.6mpm; 20.9 ± 9.9mpm; 18.2 ± 10.6mpm; respectively) with high variance among students. After receiving the anchor, students perceived significantly different rhythms; 3.5 ± 1.7mpm; 11.4 ± 2.8mpm; 16.8 ± 6.6mpm, respectively (p < 0.0001). Variance decreased significantly.
Conclusion
An anchoring bias might occur among first-year osteopathic students regarding their perception of the PRM rhythm. These results provide insights into the importance of the way of presenting information to students, especially controversial ones. Indeed, the way in which changing the ontological framework can modify the epistemological approach needs to be investigated. This could have implications on a student's clinical diagnosis. Students are encouraged to believe in their haptic ability, but also to use critical thinking.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal that provides for the publication of high quality research articles and review papers that are as broad as the many disciplines that influence and underpin the principles and practice of osteopathic medicine. Particular emphasis is given to basic science research, clinical epidemiology and health social science in relation to osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine.
The Editorial Board encourages submission of articles based on both quantitative and qualitative research designs. The Editorial Board also aims to provide a forum for discourse and debate on any aspect of osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine with the aim of critically evaluating existing practices in regard to the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with neuromusculoskeletal disorders and somatic dysfunction. All manuscripts submitted to the IJOM are subject to a blinded review process. The categories currently available for publication include reports of original research, review papers, commentaries and articles related to clinical practice, including case reports. Further details can be found in the IJOM Instructions for Authors. Manuscripts are accepted for publication with the understanding that no substantial part has been, or will be published elsewhere.