了解使用在线医生评论对医生的性别偏见

Q2 Arts and Humanities Psychology of Language and Communication Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.2478/plc-2022-0002
Sonam Gupta, Kayla Jordan
{"title":"了解使用在线医生评论对医生的性别偏见","authors":"Sonam Gupta, Kayla Jordan","doi":"10.2478/plc-2022-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Gender bias continues to be an ongoing issue in the field of medicine. While bias may come in many forms, patients’ biases and perceptions have been understudied and may impact adherence to treatment, leading to unequal outcomes. Online reviews for doctors are a naturalistic way to study gender bias. In this study, we leveraged the LIWC psychological linguistic analysis tool to analyze the language styles of ZocDoc and RateMDs reviews and understand the potential role of gender in patients’ perceptions of their doctors. Mean differences were calculated using bootstrapped hierarchical linear modeling. We found that reviews for female physicians are generally more informal and emotional than those for male physicians. While our study was exploratory, the results suggest that both patients and physicians need to increase their awareness of how their biases may be affecting how they give and receive vital health information.","PeriodicalId":20768,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Language and Communication","volume":"26 1","pages":"18 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding gender bias toward physicians using online doctor reviews\",\"authors\":\"Sonam Gupta, Kayla Jordan\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/plc-2022-0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Gender bias continues to be an ongoing issue in the field of medicine. While bias may come in many forms, patients’ biases and perceptions have been understudied and may impact adherence to treatment, leading to unequal outcomes. Online reviews for doctors are a naturalistic way to study gender bias. In this study, we leveraged the LIWC psychological linguistic analysis tool to analyze the language styles of ZocDoc and RateMDs reviews and understand the potential role of gender in patients’ perceptions of their doctors. Mean differences were calculated using bootstrapped hierarchical linear modeling. We found that reviews for female physicians are generally more informal and emotional than those for male physicians. While our study was exploratory, the results suggest that both patients and physicians need to increase their awareness of how their biases may be affecting how they give and receive vital health information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Language and Communication\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"18 - 41\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Language and Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2022-0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Language and Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2022-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要性别偏见仍然是医学领域中一个持续存在的问题。虽然偏见可能有多种形式,但患者的偏见和看法研究不足,可能会影响治疗的依从性,导致不平等的结果。医生在线评论是研究性别偏见的一种自然主义方式。在这项研究中,我们利用LIWC心理语言学分析工具来分析ZocDoc和RateMD评论的语言风格,并了解性别在患者对医生的看法中的潜在作用。使用自举分层线性模型计算平均差异。我们发现,女性医生的评论通常比男性医生的评论更为非正式和情绪化。虽然我们的研究是探索性的,但结果表明,患者和医生都需要提高对他们的偏见如何影响他们提供和接收重要健康信息的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Understanding gender bias toward physicians using online doctor reviews
Abstract Gender bias continues to be an ongoing issue in the field of medicine. While bias may come in many forms, patients’ biases and perceptions have been understudied and may impact adherence to treatment, leading to unequal outcomes. Online reviews for doctors are a naturalistic way to study gender bias. In this study, we leveraged the LIWC psychological linguistic analysis tool to analyze the language styles of ZocDoc and RateMDs reviews and understand the potential role of gender in patients’ perceptions of their doctors. Mean differences were calculated using bootstrapped hierarchical linear modeling. We found that reviews for female physicians are generally more informal and emotional than those for male physicians. While our study was exploratory, the results suggest that both patients and physicians need to increase their awareness of how their biases may be affecting how they give and receive vital health information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychology of Language and Communication
Psychology of Language and Communication Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
The ambiguous relation between verbal irony understanding and need for cognitive closure: Reports from two studies Are Polish CLIL learners more willing to communicate in English than non-CLIL learners? Twitter language samples reflect collective emotional responses following political leaders’ rhetoric during the pandemic across four countries A star is born? The German gender star and its effects on mental representation Stimulus-response binding is not a gradually learned association between specific stimuli and their responses: Evidence from a teenage bilingual population
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1