Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec 18;9(1):48.
doi: 10.1186/s41077-024-00324-0.

When common cognitive biases impact debriefing conversations

Michael J Meguerdichian  1   2 , Dana George Trottier  3 , Kimberly Campbell-Taylor  4 , Suzanne Bentley  5 , Kellie Bryant  6 , Michaela Kolbe  7 , Vincent Grant  8 , Adam Cheng  9
Affiliations

When common cognitive biases impact debriefing conversations

Michael J Meguerdichian et al. Adv Simul (Lond). .

Abstract

Healthcare debriefing is a cognitively demanding conversation after a simulation or clinical experience that promotes reflection, underpinned by psychological safety and attention to learner needs. The process of debriefing requires mental processing that engages both "fast" or unconscious thinking and "slow" intentional thinking to be able to navigate the conversation. "Fast" thinking has the potential to surface cognitive biases that impact reflection and may negatively influence debriefer behaviors, debriefing strategies, and debriefing foundations. As a result, negative cognitive biases risk undermining learning outcomes from debriefing conversations. As the use of healthcare simulation is expanding, the need for faculty development specific to the roles bias plays is imperative. In this article, we hope to build awareness about common cognitive biases that may present in debriefing conversations so debriefers have the chance to begin the hard work of identifying and attending to their potential detrimental impacts.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. Consent for publication: All parties consent to publication. Competing interests: MM, KB, MK, VG, AC are faculty for the Debriefing Academy, which runs debriefing courses for healthcare professionals. MK is faculty at the Simulation Center of the University Hospital Zurich, also providing debriefing faculty development training. MK is also a Senior Editor for Advances in Simulation.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Impact of biases on performance and outcomes
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare. 2007;2(2):115–25. 10.1097/sih.0b013e3180315539. - PubMed
    1. Dreifuerst KT. Using debriefing for meaningful learning to foster development of clinical reasoning in Simulation. J Nurs Educ. 2012;51(6):326–33. 10.3928/01484834-20120409-02. - PubMed
    1. Cheng A, Eppich W, Kolbe M, Meguerdichian M, Bajaj K, Grant V. A conceptual framework for the development of debriefing skills. Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare. 2019;15(1):55–60. 10.1097/sih.0000000000000398. - PubMed
    1. Fraser KL, Meguerdichian MJ, Haws JT, Grant VJ, Bajaj K, Cheng A. Cognitive load theory for debriefing simulations: Implications for Faculty Development. Advances in Simulation. 2018;3(1). 10.1186/s41077-018-0086-1 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meguerdichian M, Bajaj K, Ivanhoe R, Lin Y, Sloma A, de Roche A, et al. Impact of the PEARLS healthcare debriefing cognitive aid on facilitator cognitive load, workload, and debriefing quality: a pilot study. Advances in Simulation. 2022;7(1). 10.1186/s41077-022-00236-x - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources