Context Matters: Emotional Sensitivity to Probabilities and the Bias for Action in Cancer Treatment Decisions

Heather P. Lacey, Steven C. Lacey, Prerna Dayal, Caroline Forest and Dana Blasi
Additional contact information
Heather P. Lacey: Department of Psychology, Center for Health and Behavioral Sciences, Bryant University, Smithfield, RI, USA
Steven C. Lacey: Carroll School of Management, Boston University, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA
Prerna Dayal: Department of Psychology, Center for Health and Behavioral Sciences, Bryant University, Smithfield, RI, USA
Caroline Forest: Department of Psychology, Center for Health and Behavioral Sciences, Bryant University, Smithfield, RI, USA
Dana Blasi: Department of Psychology, Center for Health and Behavioral Sciences, Bryant University, Smithfield, RI, USA

Medical Decision Making, 2023, vol. 43, issue 4, 417-429

Abstract: Background Past studies have shown a commission bias for cancer treatment, a tendency to choose active treatment even when watchful waiting is less risky. This bias suggests motivations for action beyond mortality statistics, but recent evidence suggests that individuals differ in their emotional sensitivity to probabilities (ESP), the tendency to calibrate emotional reactions to probability. The current study aims to examine the role of ESP in the commission bias, specifically whether those higher in ESP are more likely to choose watchful waiting when risk probabilities align with that choice. Methods Participants ( N = 1,055) read a scenario describing a hypothetical cancer diagnosis and chose between surgery and watchful waiting, with random assignment between versions where the mortality rate was either lower for surgery or for watchful waiting. We modeled choice using the Possibility Probability Questionnaire (PPQ), a measure of ESP, and several other individual differences in a logistic regression. Results We observed a commission bias as in past studies with most participants choosing surgery both when surgery was optimal (71%) and when watchful waiting was optimal (58%). An ESP × Condition interaction indicated that the predictive role of ESP depended on condition. Those higher in ESP were more likely to choose surgery when probabilities favored surgery, β = 0.57, P

Keywords: decision-making; cancer; action bias; commission bias; risk perception; sensitivity to probabilities (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X231161341 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:43:y:2023:i:4:p:417-429

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X231161341

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().