Biomedical subjects

Ola Svenson

Publications and source records attributed to Ola Svenson.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Driver experience and cognitive workload in different traffic environments.

How do levels of cognitive workload differ between experienced and inexperienced drivers? In this study we explored cognitive workload and driver experience, using a secondary task method, the peripheral detection task (PDT) in a field study. The main results showed a large and statistically significant difference in cognitive workload levels between experienced and inexperienced drivers. Inexperienced, low mileage drivers had on average approximately 250 milliseconds (ms) longer reaction times to a peripheral stimulus, than the experienced drivers. It would, therefore, appear that drivers with better training and experience were able to automate the driving task more effectively than their less experienced counterparts in accordance with theoretical psychological models. It has been suggested that increased training and experience may provide attention resource savings that can benefit the driver in handling new or unexpected traffic situations.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Patient-focussed decision-making in early-stage prostate cancer: insights from a cognitively based decision aid.

PURPOSE: To study the cognitive processes of early-stage prostate cancer patients as they determined which treatment they preferred, using our cognitively based decision aid. METHOD: The aid was a one-to-one interview that included the structured presentation of information, listing exercises in which the patient identified attributes important to his decision, and trade-off exercises to help him weigh and integrate those attributes together. At various points of the interview, patients identified the attributes they felt were important to their decision, rated their treatment options and completed standardized assessments relating to their decision. In addition, patients participated in a follow-up interview at the time they made their actual treatment decision and again 3 months later. RESULTS: Sixty of 70 (86%) of the invited patients participated in the study. Participating patients identified a median of four important attributes (range 1-10); 36 different attributes were identified at some point in the interview by the group. During the interview, 78% of patients changed which attributes they considered important, and 72% changed their treatment ratings. Stability of treatment choice after the interview and lack of regret after the decision were each positively associated with increasing differentiation between treatment options over time. CONCLUSIONS: The decision process appears to be dynamic for the patients with great variability across patients in what is important to the decision. Increasing stability of choice and lack of regret appear to be related positively to increasing difference over time in how attractive the preferred option is over its closest competitor, rather than to the size of the difference at any one point in time.

Canada↗

PubMed2002

Value conflict and post-decision consolidation.

The primary goal of the present study was to investigate how the mental representations of value conflicts are restructured after a decision. A value conflict exists if a chosen alternative is less attractive than a non-chosen alternative on one important attribute when a decision is made. In order to follow up earlier field studies with no experimental control over value conflicts, the present study induced value conflicts in the laboratory. This was done through associating the more attractive of two alternatives with a smaller probability of success. The first hypothesis was that consolidation of value conflict attributes should follow the same pattern when the conflict is controlled experimentally as in earlier studies of real-life decisions. The second hypothesis was that consolidation should be weaker in a non-consequential laboratory study than in the earlier real-life studies. The third hypothesis was that stronger value conflicts (that is, value conflict on more important attributes) lead to greater consolidation effects than weaker value conflicts. The results showed that participants consolidated the value conflicts in the same way as in real-life decisions with the difference that also less important attributes were consolidated in the present study. However, the consolidation effects were not so strong that they caused advantage reversals on a conflict attribute, as in the earlier field studies with real outcomes and consequences. There was no relationship between strength of conflict and consolidation. The fact that no advantage reversals were registered leads to questions about the ecological validity of laboratory studies of non-consequential decision making.

Adolescent↗