Introduction

Fischhoff, Baruch; Kadvany, John

doi:10.1093/actrade/9780199576203.003.0001

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We propose one that uses behavioral decision research methods [22, 23] to implement an analytical-deliberative process, as advocated in Understanding Risk [24]. A consensus report of the National Research Council, Understanding Risk proposes that defining the terms of analyses requires an iterative process, whereby analysts interact with decision makers to clarify the implications of alternative definitions (e.g., of societal utility functions and their associated aggregation procedures).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unless the analytical-deliberative process produces a consensus, the distribution of (meta-)preferences that it elicits could be a source of inputs to sensitivity analyses. Fundamentally different ethical principles might still lead to the same choices, as has been found in risk perception studies (e.g., whether risks are incurred involuntarily and have delayed effects) [16, 23, 43]. Of course, sensitivity analyses that reflect variation in the statistic used to summarize preferences are asking a very different question than sensitivity analyses that reflect disagreement about what summary statistic to use in the first place.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Approach to Reconciling Competing Ethical Principles in Aggregating Heterogeneous Health Preferences

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Health-related quality of life (HRQL) scores are used extensively to quantify the effectiveness of medical interventions. Societal preference-based HRQL scores aim to produce societal valuations of health by aggregating valuations from individuals in the general population, where each aggregation procedure embodies different ethical principles, as explained in social choice theory. Methods Using the Health Utilities Index as an exemplar, we evaluate societal preference-based HRQL measures in the social choice theory framework. Results We find that current preference aggregation procedures are typically justified in terms of social choice theory. However, by convention, they use only one of many possible aggregation procedures (the mean). Central to the choice of aggregation procedure is how to treat preference heterogeneity, which can affect analyses that rely on HRQL scores, such as cost-effectiveness analyses. We propose an analytical-deliberative framework for choosing one (or a set of) aggregation procedure(s) in a socially credible way, which we believe to be analytically sound and empirically tractable, but leave open the institutional mechanism needed to implement it. Conclusions Socially acceptable decisions about aggregating heterogeneous preferences require eliciting stakeholders’ preferences among the set of analytically sound procedures, representing different ethical principles. We describe a framework for eliciting such preferences for the creation of HRQL scores, informed by social choice theory and behavioral decision research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Approach to Reconciling Competing Ethical Principles in Aggregating Heterogeneous Health Preferences

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People have their lives ruined and families disintegrate because of irrational thinking about financial matters, short-term thinking about their lives, and the innumeracy of various types that we measure on our rational thinking assessment, the CART [16]. For example, risks are evaluated in various suboptimal ways [64] that result in thousands of deaths due to texting and electronics-distracted driving [65]. Irrational thinking sustains pathological gambling and other behavioral problems [66].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Think Rationally about World Problems

Stanovich

2018

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I agree with the target essay that psychology has something to offer in helping to address societal problems. Intelligence has helped meliorate some social problems throughout history, including the period of time that is covered by the Flynn effect, but I agree with Sternberg that other psychological characteristics may be contributing as well, particularly increases in rationality. I also believe that increasing human rationality could have a variety of positive societal affects at levels somewhat smaller in grain size than the societal problems that Sternberg focuses on. Some of the societal problems that Sternberg lists, however, I do not think would be remedied by increases in rationality, intelligence, or wisdom, because remedy might be the wrong word in the context of these issues. Issues such as how much inequality of income to tolerate, how much pollution to tolerate, and how much we should sacrifice economic growth for potential future changes in global temperature represent issues of clashing values, not the inability to process information, nor the lack of information, nor the failure to show wisdom.

show abstract

“…Patients with value awareness understand their options, the limits to that understanding, and the opportunities to learn more. 28 There are vast literatures on how to communicate expected risks and benefits, in terms of both quantitative estimates of expected outcomes and the qualitative processes generating them. Although researchers are continuing to refine these methods, the practical challenge is applying what is known.…”

Section: The Value Awareness Idealmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value Awareness: A New Goal for End-of-life Decision Making

Fischhoff

Barnato

2019

MDM Policy & Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The principal policy tool for respecting the preferences of patients facing serious illnesses that can prompt decisions regarding end-of-life care is the advance directive (AD) for health care. AD policies, decision aids for facilitating ADs, and clinical processes for interpreting ADs all treat patients as rational actors who will make appropriate choices, if provided relevant information. We review barriers to following this model, leading us to propose replacing the goal of rational choice with that of value awareness, enabling patients (and, where appropriate, their surrogates) to be as rational as they can and want to be when making these fateful choices. We propose approaches, and supporting research, suited to individuals’ cognitive, affective, and social circumstances, resources, and desires.

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

An Approach to Reconciling Competing Ethical Principles in Aggregating Heterogeneous Health Preferences

An Approach to Reconciling Competing Ethical Principles in Aggregating Heterogeneous Health Preferences

How to Think Rationally about World Problems

Value Awareness: A New Goal for End-of-life Decision Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About