Objective: The aim of this review is to summarize current research relating to psychological processes involved in judgment and decision-making (JDM) and identify which processes can be incorporated and used in the construct of health literacy (HL) in order to enrich its conceptualization and to provide more information about people’s preferences. Methods: The literature review was aimed at identifying comprehensive research in the field; therefore appropriate databases were searched for English language articles dated from 1998 to 2015. Results: Several psychological processes have been found to be constituents of JDM and potentially incorporated in the definition of HL: cognition, self-regulation, emotion, reasoning-thinking, and social perception. Conclusion: HL research can benefit from this JDM literature overview, first, by elaborating on the idea that judgment is multidimensional and constituted by several specific processes, and second, by using the results to implement the definition of “judgment skills”. Moreover, this review can favor the development of new instruments that can measure HL. Practical implications: Future researchers in HL should work together with researchers in psychological sciences not only to investigate the processes behind JDM in-depth but also to create effective opportunities to improve HL in all patients, to promote good decisions, and orient patients’ preferences in all health contexts

Riva, S., Antonietti, A., Iannello, P., Pravettoni, G., What are judgment skills in health literacy? A psycho-cognitive perspective of judgment and decision-making research, <<PATIENT PREFERENCE AND ADHERENCE>>, 2015; (9): 1677-1686. [doi:10.2147/PPA.S90207] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/70660]

What are judgment skills in health literacy? A psycho-cognitive perspective of judgment and decision-making research

Riva, Silvia;Antonietti, Alessandro;Iannello, Paola;
2015

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this review is to summarize current research relating to psychological processes involved in judgment and decision-making (JDM) and identify which processes can be incorporated and used in the construct of health literacy (HL) in order to enrich its conceptualization and to provide more information about people’s preferences. Methods: The literature review was aimed at identifying comprehensive research in the field; therefore appropriate databases were searched for English language articles dated from 1998 to 2015. Results: Several psychological processes have been found to be constituents of JDM and potentially incorporated in the definition of HL: cognition, self-regulation, emotion, reasoning-thinking, and social perception. Conclusion: HL research can benefit from this JDM literature overview, first, by elaborating on the idea that judgment is multidimensional and constituted by several specific processes, and second, by using the results to implement the definition of “judgment skills”. Moreover, this review can favor the development of new instruments that can measure HL. Practical implications: Future researchers in HL should work together with researchers in psychological sciences not only to investigate the processes behind JDM in-depth but also to create effective opportunities to improve HL in all patients, to promote good decisions, and orient patients’ preferences in all health contexts
Inglese
Riva, S., Antonietti, A., Iannello, P., Pravettoni, G., What are judgment skills in health literacy? A psycho-cognitive perspective of judgment and decision-making research, <<PATIENT PREFERENCE AND ADHERENCE>>, 2015; (9): 1677-1686. [doi:10.2147/PPA.S90207] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/70660]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
dm in health literacy.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia file ?: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 213.36 kB
Formato Unknown
213.36 kB Unknown Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/70660
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 8
  • Scopus 15
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 16
social impact