Reasoning Used (reasoning + used)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


Diagnostic reasoning strategies and diagnostic success

MEDICAL EDUCATION, Issue 8 2003
S Coderre
Purpose Cognitive psychology research supports the notion that experts use mental frameworks or ,schemes', both to organize knowledge in memory and to solve clinical problems. The central purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between problem-solving strategies and the likelihood of diagnostic success. Methods Think-aloud protocols were collected to determine the diagnostic reasoning used by experts and non-experts when attempting to diagnose clinical presentations in gastroenterology. Results Using logistic regression analysis, the study found that there is a relationship between diagnostic reasoning strategy and the likelihood of diagnostic success. Compared to hypothetico-deductive reasoning, the odds of diagnostic success were significantly greater when subjects used the diagnostic strategies of pattern recognition and scheme-inductive reasoning. Two other factors emerged as independent determinants of diagnostic success: expertise and clinical presentation. Not surprisingly, experts outperformed novices, while the content area of the clinical cases in each of the four clinical presentations demonstrated varying degrees of difficulty and thus diagnostic success. Conclusions These findings have significant implications for medical educators. It supports the introduction of ,schemes' as a means of enhancing memory organization and improving diagnostic success. [source]


Moral reasoning among physical therapists: results of the defining issues test

PHYSIOTHERAPY RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, Issue 2 2010
Laura Lee Swisher
Abstract Background and Purpose.,Although there is extensive literature in other health care fields about the ability to make ethical judgements (moral reasoning), there is a paucity of research addressing the moral reasoning of practising physical therapists. The purposes of this research were to 1) identify the types of moral reasoning used by practising physical therapists as measured by the Defining Issues Test; 2) identify differences in moral reasoning among physical therapists based on educational background, demographic variables, clinical experience, practice setting or expertise in ethics; and 3) compare the moral reasoning of physical therapists with that of other professional groups.,Methods.,The Defining Issues Test of James Rest was used to evaluate moral reasoning. Five hundred thirty-seven physical therapists responded to a mail survey sent to a random sample of 2,000 American Physical Therapy Association members. Twelve physical therapists with expertise in ethics or professionalism completed the same survey.,Results.,The mean postconventional score for the random sample was 41.93. This score was lower than the mean scores of physicians, nurses, medical students, nursing students and dental students established in previous research. Females, ethics experts and those in academic settings had higher postconventional scores.,Conclusions.,Physical therapists scored lower in postconventional moral reasoning than some other professional groups with similar educational background. Factors that may inhibit or enhance the development of moral reasoning among physical therapists and possible consequences of high or low moral reasoning scores in physical therapy require further research. These findings may raise concerns about the entry-level educational curriculum and professional development opportunities in the area of ethics and moral reasoning. Results of this research may also highlight the challenges of evaluation, scholarship and research in physical therapy ethics. Further research and theory development is needed to address the relationships between moral theory and descriptive or empirical research within physical therapy. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]


THE RETURN OF THE NATURALISTIC FALLACY: A DIALOGUE ON HUMAN FLOURISHING

THE HEYTHROP JOURNAL, Issue 3 2008
FRANCIS MICHAEL WALSH
In response to the proposal justifying the morality of homosexual acts offered by Todd A. Salzman and Michael G. Lawler, this paper seeks to make intelligible the reasoning used by the New Natural Law Theory and others that arrives at the opposite conclusion. This article proposes to explore the weaknesses in the arguments offered in justification. By proposing an expanded notion of human nature so as to include sexual orientation as one of the factors from which to draw moral norms, the authors have adopted the central proposition of the Old Natural Law Theory defended by Francisco Suarez and others, viz., that human nature as such was a fit source from which to draw moral norms. Thus the New Natural Law Theory, formulated by Germain Grisez to answer the charge of the naturalistic fallacy, has curiously found itself being refuted by a reformulation of the Old Natural Law Theory. This article seeks to show how the proportionalistic reasoning used by Salzman and Lawler leads inevitably to a revival of the naturalistic fallacy. [source]


EPIDEMIOLOGY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE IN LIGHT OF SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH RESEARCH

BIOETHICS, Issue 2 2009
SRIDHAR VENKATAPURAM
ABSTRACT The present article identifies how social determinants of health raise two categories of philosophical problems that also fall within the smaller domain of ethics; one set pertains to the philosophy of epidemiology, and the second set pertains to the philosophy of health and social justice. After reviewing these two categories of ethical concerns, the limited conclusion made is that identifying and responding to social determinants of health requires inter-disciplinary reasoning across epidemiology and philosophy. For the reasoning used in epidemiology to be sound, for its scope and (moral) purpose as a science to be clarified as well as for social justice theory to be relevant and coherent, epidemiology and philosophy need to forge a meaningful exchange of ideas that happens in both directions. [source]