Search

Storylines of Family Medicine is a 12-part series of thematically linked essays with accompanying illustrations that explore the many dimensions of family medicine, as interpreted by individual family physicians and medical educators in the USA and elsewhere around the world. In 'V: ways of thinking-honing the therapeutic self', authors present the following sections: 'Reflective practice in action', 'The doctor as drug-Balint groups', 'Cultivating compassion', 'Towards a humanistic approach to doctoring', 'Intimacy in family medicine', 'The many faces of suffering', 'Transcending suffering' and 'The power of listening to stories.' May readers feel a deeper sense of their own therapeutic agency by reflecting on these essays.

Recent research has highlighted the impacts of colonialism and racism in global health, yet few studies have presented concrete steps toward addressing the problems. We conducted a narrative review to identify published evidence that documented guiding frameworks for enhancing equity and inclusion in global health research and practice (GHRP). Based on this narrative review, we developed a questionnaire with a series of reflection questions related on commonly reported challenges related to diversity, inclusion, equity, and power imbalances. To reach consensus on a set of priority questions relevant to each theme, the questionnaire was sent to a sample of 18 global health experts virtually and two rounds of iterations were conducted. Results identified eight thematic areas and 19 reflective questions that can assist global health researchers and practitioners striving to implement socially just global health reforms. Key elements identified for improving GHRP include: (1) aiming to understand the historical context and power dynamics within the areas touched by the program; (2) promoting and mobilizing local stakeholders and leadership and ensuring measures for their participation in decision-making; (3) ensuring that knowledge products are co-produced and more equitably accessible; (4) establishing a more holistic feedback and accountability system to understand needed reforms based on local perspectives; and (5) applying systems thinking to addressing challenges and encouraging approaches that can be sustained long-term. GHRP professionals should reflect more deeply on how their goals align with those of their in-country collaborators. The consistent application of reflective processes has the potential to shift GHRP towards increased equity.

Stock splits and reverse splits often result in short-term abnormal returns even though such split events do not change any fundamental factors affecting the valuation of a firm's stock. In this paper we report an experiment designed to better understand market reactions to stock splits and reverse splits. In one treatment, two assets have increasing fundamental values, and one asset is subject to a 2-for-1 share split while the other asset is not. In a second treatment, the fundamental values of both assets are decreasing, and one asset is subject to a 1-for-2 reverse split while the other asset is not. We find that in both cases, share prices do not fully adjust to changes in fundamental values per share following a split announcement. We provide evidence that the incomplete adjustment of share prices to splits or reverse splits can be attributed to heterogeneity in traders' cognitive abilities.

The cognitive reflection test (CRT; Frederick, 2005) assesseshow well adults can reflect on the validity of their ownthinking, and it has been shown to predict several measures ofnormative reasoning. Here, we sought to create a version ofthe cognitive reflection test suitable for elementary-school-aged children, which could be used to study the emergence ofcognitive reflection as well as its role in the development ofother forms of higher-order cognition. We identified eightchild-friendly questions that elicit an incorrect, intuitiveresponse that must be inhibited in order to provide a correct,analytic response. We compared children’s and adults’performance on these questions (dubbed the CRT-D) toseveral measures of rational thinking (denominator neglect,base rate sensitivity, syllogistic reasoning, otherside thinking)and thinking dispositions (actively open-minded thinking,need for cognition). The CRT-D was a significant predictor ofrational thinking and normative thinking dispositions in bothchildren and adults. Moreover, performance on the CRT-Dcorrelated with performance on the original CRT in adults,and in children, it predicted rational thinking and normativethinking dispositions above and beyond age. These resultssuggest that the CRT-D is a valid measure of children’scognitive reflection and pave the way for future investigationsof its development and its developmental consequences.

The Monty Hall Dilemma (MHD) is a well-known cognitiveillusion. It is often claimed that one reason for the incorrectanswers is that people apply the equiprobability principle: theyassume that the probability of the two remaining options mustbe equal. An alternative explanation for assigning the sameprobabilities to options is that they had the same priorprobabilities and people perceive no significant change.Standard MHD versions do not distinguish these possibilities,but a version with unequal prior probabilities could.Participants were given an unequal probabilities version ofMHD and told that either the high or low probability option hadbeen eliminated. This affected participants’ choices and theirposterior probabilities. Only 14% of participants’ responseswere consistent with applying the equiprobability principle, but51% were consistent with a “no change” principle. Participantswere sensitive to the implications of the prior probabilities butdid not appear to use Bayesian updating.

The Monty Hall Dilemma (MHD) is a classic brain teaser thateven mathematicians appear to consistently answerincorrectly, and when the correct solution is presented peopleremain unconvinced. We examined how convincing werethree solution types: a simple statement of the solution, aguided diagram solution, or simulated trials. Participants weregiven the MHD, followed by one of the three types ofsolutions, then we measured their level of conviction andtheir numeracy, Cognitive Reflection (CR), Need forCognition (NFC), and Openness. Overall, both guideddiagrams and simulated trials led to higher convictioncompared to a simple solution statement. Higher numeracyand higher CR were associated with lower conviction afterthe simple solution; furthermore higher numeracy tended tohelp more in the simulation condition, whereas higher CRhelped more in the guided condition. Therefore thepersuasiveness of a solution depended both on its nature andcharacteristics of individual reasoners.