Centre for Health Informatics, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2009 Dec;15(6):993-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01350.x.
Traditional decision research shows that when people are told the probability of a rare event (e.g. the chance of side effects), they generally treat this event as if it were more likely than its objective probability (overweighting). In contrast, recent studies indicate that when outcomes are experienced firsthand, people tend to underweight the probability of rare events. In this paper, we suggest that the distinction between described and experienced information can play a significant role in shared decision making, and can provide a plausible explanation for some discrepancies between the perspectives of doctors and patients. We highlight some of the advantages and disadvantages of experiential and description-based information, and how knowledge of these might be used to improve risk communication.
传统决策研究表明，当人们被告知罕见事件（如副作用的发生概率）的概率时，他们通常会将该事件视为比其客观概率（过度重视）更有可能发生的事件。相比之下，最近的研究表明，当人们直接体验到结果时，他们往往会低估罕见事件的概率。在本文中，我们认为，描述性信息和体验性信息之间的区别在共同决策中起着重要作用，并为医生和患者观点之间的一些差异提供了一个合理的解释。我们强调了体验性信息和基于描述的信息的一些优缺点，以及如何利用这些知识来改善风险沟通。
