Hindsight Bias: An Impediment to Accurate Probability Estimation in Clinicopathologic Conferences

Neal V. Dawson, Hal Arkes, Carl Siciliano, Richard Blinkhorn, Mark Lakshmanan and Mary Petrelli

Medical Decision Making, 1988, vol. 8, issue 4, 259-264

Abstract: Although clinicopathologic conferences (CPCs) have been valued for teaching differential diagnosis, their instructional value may be compromised by hindsight bias. This bias occurs when those who know the actual diagnosis overestimate the likelihood that they would have been able to predict the correct diagnosis had they been asked to do so beforehand. Evidence for the presence of the hindsight bias was sought among 160 physicians and trainees attending four CPCs. Before the correct diagnosis was announced, half of the conference audience estimated the probability that each of five possible diagnoses was correct (foresight subjects). After the correct diagnosis was announced the remaining (hindsight) subjects estimated the probability they would have assigned to each of the five possible diagnoses had they been making the initial differential diagnosis. Only 30% of the foresight subjects ranked the correct diagnosis as first, versus 50% of the hindsight subjects (p

Date: 1988
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X8800800406 (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:8:y:1988:i:4:p:259-264

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8800800406

Access Statistics for this article

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