The difficulty with experience: Does practice increase susceptibility to premature closure?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A recent review of the physician performance literature concluded that the risk of prematurely closing one's diagnostic search increases with years of experience. To minimize confounding variables and gain insight into cognitive issues relevant to continuing education, the current study was performed to test this conclusion. METHODS: Physician participants were shown a series of case histories and asked to judge the probability of a pair of diagnoses. The order in which features were presented was manipulated across participants and the probabilities compared to determine the impact of information order. Two groups of participants were recruited, 1 older than and 1 younger than 60 years. RESULTS: The probability assigned to a diagnosis tended to be greater when features consistent with that diagnosis preceded those consistent with an alternative than when the same features followed those consistent with the alternative. Older participants revealed a greater primacy effect than less experienced participants across 4 experimental conditions. DISCUSSION: Physicians with greater experience appear to weigh their first impressions more heavily than those with less experience. Educators should design instructional activities that account for experience-specific cognitive tendencies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".