Description
Response Paper 15:
1. According to Hal Arkes' article on the consequences of the hindsight bias in medical decision making, what is the hindsight bias and how does it influence the decisions made by jurors in medical malpractice law suits?
Economists Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein wrote a book called "Nudge" about the ways that government policies can "nudge" people towards making decisions that are in line with their own best interests as well as societal best interest. The excerpt that you read details two examples. First - how to get more senior citizens to sign up for a medicare prescription drug coverage that would save seniors and the government large amounts of money. Second - how to increase organ donation rates to get more organs from people who are willing to donate them (usually after death) to those who need them.
2. Most states randomly assigned senior citizens into medicare plans (if the individual subscriber did not make their own choice). Maine used an "intelligent" default plan. Describe these two plans (random default vs. intelligent assignment). Which led to better outcomes?
3. Thaler and Sunstein describe 3 possible methods of obtaining consent to donate organs. Identify and describe these 3 methods. Which of these methods is the one used by most states in the US?
Discussion Forum 10:
In your opinion, should it be legal for people to buy organs from those who are willing to donate them? Why or why not? (respond to one classmate)
Explanation & Answer
View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.please let me know if you have revisions.
1. According to Hal Arkes' article on the consequences of the hindsight bias in medical decision
making, what is the hindsight bias and how does it influence the decisions made by jurors in medical
malpractice law suits?
The hindsight bias expresses itself as an exaggeration of the extent to which a previous occurrence
might have been foreseen in advance. The hindsight bias has an especially negative impact on medical
decision making. After the right diagnosis is revealed, it appears that it could have been simply predicted
earlier (Arkes, 2013, pg. 356). Hindsight bias is the propensity to overestimate one's ability to predict the
outcome of an event, such as an experiment, after knowing the conclusion. It's known popularly as the
"I knew it all along" phenomena. Humans are typically inefficient at such decisions, according to
research into mental cognition(Arkes, 2013, pg. 357). If people are informed that an event did occur,
they frequently overestimate its likelihood.
Given that hindsight bias undermines the instructional value of a CPC, it would be beneficial if there was
a means to mitigate its detrimental influence. Insidious hindsight bias also contributes to unreasonable
overconfidence (Arkes, 2013, pg. 357). Malpractice judgements are always given with hindsight in mind.
An adverse event has already occurred, and jurors are being asked to decide whether a physician
fulfilled the standard of care in treating the patient. Because they have the advantage of hindsight, the
juror believes they would have done better. As a result, physicians are being punished even more
severely.
Economists Richard Thaler and Cass Suns...
