PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9316255

Basic and applied research on choice responding.

W W Fisher·J E Mazur
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Choice responding refers to the manner in which individuals allocate their time or responding among available response options. In this article, we first review basic investigations that have identified and examined variables that influence choice responding, such as response effort and reinforcement rate, immediacy, and quality. We then describe recent bridge and applied studies that illustrate how the results of basic research on choice responding can help to account for human behavior in natural environments and improve clinical assessments and interventions.

Explore related subjects

Choice BehaviorDecision MakingHumansMotivationPhysical ExertionReinforcement, PsychologyJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W W Fisher, J E Mazur. 1997. Basic and applied research on choice responding.. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-387

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

Informed choice in genetic screening for thalassaemia during pregnancy: audit from a national confidential inquiry.

OBJECTIVE: National audit of informed choice in antenatal screening for thalassaemia. DESIGN: Audit from the UK Confidential Enquiry into Counselling for Genetic Disorders. SETTING: Thalassaemia module of the UK Confidential Enquiry into Counselling for Genetic Disorders. SUBJECTS: 138 of 156 couples who had had a pregnancy affected by a major beta thalassaemia from 1990 to 1994. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: How and when genetic risk was identified for each couple, and whether and when prenatal diagnosis was offered. RESULTS: Risk was detected by screening before or during the first pregnancy in 49% (68/138) of couples and by diagnosis of an affected child in 28% (38/138) of couples. Prenatal diagnosis was offered in 69% (274/400) of pregnancies, ranging from 94% (122/130) for British Cypriots to 54% (80/149) for British Pakistanis and from 90% in the south east of England to 39% in the West Midlands. Uptake of prenatal diagnosis was 80% (216/274), ranging from 98% (117/120) among British Cypriots in either the first or second trimester to 73% (35/48) among British Pakistanis in the first trimester and 39% (11/28) in the second trimester. A demonstrable service failure occurred in 28% (110/400) of pregnancies, including 110 of 126 where prenatal diagnosis was not offered and 48 of 93 that ended with an affected liveborn infant. CONCLUSION: Although antenatal screening and counselling for haemoglobin disorders are standard practices in the United Kingdom, they are delivered inadequately and inequitably. An explicit national policy is needed, aiming to make prenatal diagnosis in the first trimester available to all couples and including ongoing national audit.

Choice Behavior↗
PubMed1999

Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of randomised trials of patient decision aids in improving decision making and outcomes. DESIGN: We included randomised trials of interventions providing structured, detailed, and specific information on treatment or screening options and outcomes to aid decision making. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data on several evaluation criteria. Results were pooled by using weighted mean differences and relative risks. RESULTS: 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the controls, decision aids produced higher knowledge scores (weighted mean difference=19/100, 95% confidence interval 14 to 25); lower decisional conflict scores (weighted mean difference=-0.3/5, -0.4 to -0.1); more active patient participation in decision making (relative risk = 2.27, 95% confidence interval 1. 3 to 4); and no differences in anxiety, satisfaction with decisions (weighted mean difference=0.6/100, -3 to 4), or satisfaction with the decision making process (2/100,-3 to 7). Decision aids had a variable effect on decisions. When complex decision aids were compared with simpler versions, they were better at reducing decisional conflict, improved knowledge marginally, but did not affect satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Decision aids improve knowledge, reduce decisional conflict, and stimulate patients to be more active in decision making without increasing their anxiety. Decision aids have little effect on satisfaction and a variable effect on decisions. The effects on outcomes of decisions (persistence with choice, quality of life) remain uncertain.

Choice Behavior↗