Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Conscious versus unconscious thinking in the medical domain: the deliberation-without-attention effect examined Cover

Conscious versus unconscious thinking in the medical domain: the deliberation-without-attention effect examined

Open Access
|Jun 2014

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Medical characteristics as distributed over the four patients; each characteristic was neutral or favourable (+) in two patients and unfavourable (−/−) in the other two

Medical characteristica

Patient Lo

Patient Med1

Patient Med2

Patient Hi

Smoking

−/−

+

−/−

+

Body mass index (kg/m2)

+ (22)

−/− (30)↑

+ (23.5)

−/− (30.5)↑

Family history

−/−

+

−/−

+

Total cholesterol (mmol/L)

−/− (7.3)↑

−/− (7.2)↑

+ (5.3)

+ (5.1)

Blood pressure (mm/Hg)

−/− (170/110)↑

+ (140/80)

−/− (180/105)↑

+ (135/85)

Alcohol use

−/−

+

−/−

+

Haemoglobin (mmol/L)

−/− (6.3)↓

−/− (6.0)↓

+ (8.9)

+ (9.2)

Proteinuria (g/days)

−/− (1.3)↑

−/− (1.0)↑

+

+

Fasting blood sugar (mmol/L)

−/− (10.5)↑

−/− (11)↑

+ (5.0)

+ (4.5)

Body exercise

+

+

−/−

−/−

C-reactive protein (mg/L)

+ (3)

−/− (22)↑

+ (2)

−/− (23)↑

Serum creatinine (μmol/L)

−/− (125)↑

+ (70)

−/− (127)↑

+ (72)

25 + 75 % −/−

50 + 50 % −/−

50 + 50 % −/−

75 + 25 % −/−

aOnly the first four characteristics (in italics) were used in the Simple versions; ↑ = elevated (or obesity in case of BMI); ↓ = lowered

Table 2

Study design

Mode of thought

Simple versions (SIM)

Complex versions (CPX)

Conscious (CSC)

4 × 4 statements

4 × 12 statements

4 min conscious thought

4 min conscious thought

Unconscious (UNC)

4× 4 statements

4× 12 statements

4 min anagrams

4 min anagrams

Table 3

Mean ranks of percentages given by novices and experts in their assessments of life expectancy, after conscious or unconscious thought (lowest percentage: rank = 1; highest percentage: rank = 4)

Level of expertise

Simple/Complex

Conscious/Unconscious

Patienta

Mean

SE

Novices (N = 57)

Simple (N = 29)

CSC (N = 15)

Lo

2.03

0.27

Med1

2.40

0.25

Med2

2.37

0.24

Hi

3.20

0.29

UNC (N = 14)

Lo

2.14

0.28

Med1

2.57

0.25

Med2

2.57

0.25

Hi

2.71

0.30

Complex (N = 28)

CSC (N = 15)

Lo

2.43

0.27

Med1

2.47

0.25

Med2

2.20

0.24

Hi

2.90

0.29

UNC (N = 13)

Lo

1.54

0.29

Med1

2.89

0.26

Med2

2.81

0.26

Hi

2.77

0.31

Expertsb (N = 86)

Simple (N = 27)

CSC (N = 14)

Lo

2.18

0.28

Med1

2.25

0.25

Med2

2.46

0.25

Hi

3.11

0.30

UNC (N = 13)

Lo

1.96

0.29

Med1

1.92

0.26

Med2

3.12

0.26

Hi

3.00

0.31

Complex (N = 59)

CSC (N = 28)

Lo

1.68

0.20

Med1

2.54

0.18

Med2

2.41

0.18

Hi

3.38

0.21

UNC (N = 31)

Lo

1.98

0.19

Med1

2.24

0.17

Med2

2.52

0.17

Hi

3.26

0.20

CSC conscious thought, UNC unconscious thought, SE standard error

aPatient Lo has the lowest life expectancy, patient Hi the highest, and patients Med1 and Med2 in between; the lower the mean rank for Patient Lo and the higher the mean rank for Patient Hi, the more accurate the assessments

bWe recruited a greater number of experts to participate in the complex conditions to examine differences in level of expertise; there was no significant difference, therefore we collapsed the two groups

Table 4

Mean rank correlations (Rho) between participant ranks and objective ranks

Simple/Complex

Conscious/Unconscious

Mean

SE

Novices

 Simple

CSC

0.35

0.15

UNC

0.19

0.16

 Complex

CSC

0.12

0.15

UNC

0.37

0.16

Experts

 Simple

CSC

0.31

0.16

UNC

0.47

0.16

 Complex

CSC

0.53

0.11

UNC

0.47

0.11

CSC conscious thought, UNC unconscious thought; higher means correspond with better task performance

Language: English
Published on: Jun 4, 2014
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2014 Benno Bonke, Robert Zietse, Geoff Norman, Henk G. Schmidt, Roger Bindels, Sı´lvia Mamede, Remy Rikers, published by Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.