Physicians have feelings: illuminating the relationship between emotional valence, clinical reasoning and context specificity.

Introduction: Research demonstrates that emotions play an important role in clinical reasoning (CR); however, the relationship between emotional valence, CR, and the context in which reasoning takes place, remains to be empirically explored. While situated cognition has been used to investigate CR and context specificity (e.g. the presence of contextual factors, things other than the information directly related to establishing a diagnosis), it has not explicitly examined the role of emotional valence during CR encounters. Our research question was how do emotional valence and arousal emerge in CR, particularly in the presence or absence of contextual factors?

Methods: Physicians (n = 45) reviewed two video cases, one with contextual factors and one without. Immediately afterwards, participants completed a 'think-aloud' while reviewing cases. Thematic analysis was used to code transcribed think-alouds for CR activities, emotional valence (positive, neutral or negative) and arousal by three researchers. Frequencies and relationships between codes were compared, both in the presence or absence of contextual factors.

Results: The majority of emotional valence codes were neutral (85.2%), with negative valence more frequent (11.2%) than positive valence (3.5%). Five CR themes were consistently demonstrated: knowledge organization (with two sub-themes of linking and differential diagnosis formation), proceeding with caution, curiosity, assumption, and reflection. In the presence of contextual factors, there was an increase in negative valence with a decrease in positive valence, as well as a shift in CR from knowledge organization to curiosity and proceeding with caution.

Discussion: The complex interaction between clinical reasoning themes, emotional valence, and changes with contextual factors have important implications for clinical practice, education, and future research on CR.