Cited by 575Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsEmpathy and Medical Education

Positive Affect Facilitates Integration of Information and Decreases Anchoring in Reasoning among Physicians

Estrada, Carlos A, Isen, Alice M, Young, Mark J·1997·Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/obhd.1997.2734

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Physicians experiencing positive emotions consider more alternative hypotheses before committing to their initial diagnostic assumption.

    “practicing physicians experiencing positive emotions consider a greater number of alternative hypotheses before committing to their initial diagnostic assumption (Estrada, Isen, & Young, 1997)”

    From Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health (2010) · cites this paper as Estrada, Isen, & Young, 1997

  • Individuals in a positive mood perform more effectively in complex decision-making tasks, such as choosing a car or making medical decisions.

    “perform more effectively in complex decision-making tasks, such as choosing a car or making medical decisions (Estrada et al., 1997; Isen and Means, 1983).”

    From The Groupfeel syndrome: a theory of a counterproductive group emotion (2026) · cites this paper as Estrada et al., 1997

  • Positive affect is linked to a creative and more generative mindset that results in greater cognitive flexibility across diverse situations.

    “Consistent with such views, a robust and widely confirmed finding is that positive affect is linked to a creative and more generative mindset that results in greater cognitive flexibility across diverse situations, including medical diagnosis (13, 14), industrial negotiations (15), intuitive judgments (16), decision making (17), and creative problem-solving tasks (18, 19).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Estrada, C. A., Isen, A. M., & Young, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Henry Ford Hospital (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
Venue
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-10
Volume
72
Issue
1
Pages
117-135
ISSN
0749-5978 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047038396
Cited by
572
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 27
FWCI
7.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
Keywords
positive affect, clinical reasoning, anchoring, information integration, physicians, standardized patients, affect induction, heuristic processing, premature closure, liver disease diagnosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review