Injury Risk Estimation Expertise: Interdisciplinary Differences in Performance on the ACL Injury Risk Estimation Quiz

Background: Simple observational assessment of movement is a potentially low-cost method for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury screening and prevention. Although many individuals utilize some form of observational assessment of movement, there are currently no substantial data on group skill differences in observational screening of ACL injury risk. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare various groups’ abilities to visually assess ACL injury risk as well as the associated strategies and ACL knowledge levels. The hypothesis was that sports medicine professionals would perform better than coaches and exercise science academics/students and that these subgroups would all perform better than parents and other general population members. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 428 individuals, including physicians, physical therapists, athletic trainers, strength and conditioning coaches, exercise science researchers/students, athletes, parents, and members of the general public participated in the study. Participants completed the ACL Injury Risk Estimation Quiz (ACL-IQ) and answered questions related to assessment strategy and ACL knowledge. Results: Strength and conditioning coaches, athletic trainers, physical therapists, and exercise science students exhibited consistently superior ACL injury risk estimation ability (þ2 SD) as compared with sport coaches, parents of athletes, and members of the general public. The performance of a substantial number of individuals in the exercise sciences/sports medicines (approximately 40%) was similar to or exceeded clinical instrument-based biomechanical assessment methods (eg, ACL nomogram). Parents, sport coaches, and the general public had lower ACL-IQ, likely due to their lower ACL knowledge and to rating the importance of knee/thigh motion lower and weight and jump height higher. Conclusion: Substantial cross-professional/group differences in visual ACL injury risk estimation exist. The relatively profound differences in injury risk estimation accuracy and their potential implications for risk screening suggest the need for additional training and outreach

Cross-professional differences in real-time assessment of ACL injury risk

Simple visual inspection of movement is a potentially low cost method for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury screening and prevention. Although many professionals, athletes, and coaches utilize some form of visual inspection of movement/injury risk, there is currently no substantial data on group skill differences. Sports medicine professionals, exercise science students/academics, and strength and conditioning coaches exhibited consistently superior ACL injury risk estimation skill compared to sport coaches, parents of athletes and the general public (about 2 standard deviations). In addition, many individuals’ visual risk assessment accuracy was similar to or exceeded clinical instrument-based biomechanical assessment methods (i.e., ACL nomogram). Perceptual-cognitive mechanisms are discussed

Visual estimation of ACL injury risk: Efficient assessment method, group differences, and expertise mechanisms

Simple observational assessment of movement quality (e.g., drop vertical jump biomechanics) is an efficient and low cost method for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury screening and prevention. A recently developed test (see www.ACL-IQ.org) has revealed substantial cross-professional/group differences in visual ACL injury risk estimation skill. Specifically, parents, sport coaches, and to some degree sports medicine physicians, would likely benefit from training or the use of decision support tools. In addition, expertise mechanisms (perceptual-cognitive characteristics of skilled performers) were investigated in order to design training systems to improve risk estimation performance

CROSS-PROFESSIONAL DIFFERENCES IN REAL-TIME ASSESSMENT OF ACL INJURY RISK

Simple visual inspection of movement is a potentially low cost method for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury screening and prevention. Although many professionals, athletes, and coaches utilize some form of visual inspection of movement/injury risk, there is currently no substantial data on group skill differences. Sports medicine professionals, exercise science students/academics, and strength and conditioning coaches exhibited consistently superior ACL injury risk estimation skill compared to sport coaches, parents of athletes and the general public (about 2 standard deviations). In addition, many individuals’ visual risk assessment accuracy was similar to or exceeded clinical instrument-based biomechanical assessment methods (i.e., ACL nomogram). Perceptual-cognitive mechanisms are discussed

Injury Risk Estimation Expertise Assessing the ACL Injury Risk Estimation Quiz

Background: Available methods for screening anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk are effective but limited in application as they generally rely on expensive and time-consuming biomechanical movement analysis. A potential efficient alternative to biomechanical screening is skilled movement analysis via visual inspection (ie, having experts estimate injury risk factors based on observations of athletes’ movements). Purpose: To develop a brief, valid psychometric assessment of ACL injury risk factor estimation skill: the ACL Injury Risk Estimation Quiz (ACL-IQ). Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 660 individuals participated in various stages of the study, including athletes, physicians, physical therapists, athletic trainers, exercise science researchers/students, and members of the general public in the United States. The ACL-IQ was fully computerized and made available online (www.ACL-IQ.org). Item sampling/reduction, reliability analysis, cross-validation, and convergent/discriminant validity analysis were conducted to optimize the efficiency and validity of the assessment. Results: Psychometric optimization techniques identified a short (mean time, 2 min 24 s), robust, 5-item assessment with high reliability (test-retest: r = 0.90) and consistent discriminability (average difference of exercise science professionals vs general population: Cohen d = 1.98). Exercise science professionals and general population individuals scored 74% and 53% correct, respectively. Convergent and discriminant validity was demonstrated. Scores on the ACL-IQ were most associated with ACL knowledge and various cue utilities and were least associated with domain-general spatial/decision-making ability, personality, or other demographic variables. Overall, 23% of the total sample (40% exercise science professionals; 6% general population) performed better than or equal to the ACL nomogram. Conclusion: This study presents the results of a systematic approach to assess individual differences in ACL injury risk factor estimation skill; the assessment approach is efficient (ie, it can be completed in\3 min) and psychometrically robust. The results provide evidence that some individuals have the ability to visually estimate ACL injury risk factors more accurately than other instrument-based ACL risk estimation methods (ie, ACL nomogram). The ACL-IQ provides the foundation for assessing the efficacy of observational ACL injury risk factor assessment (ie, does simple skilled visual inspection reduce ACL injuries?). It also provides a representative task environment that can be used to increase our understanding of the perceptual-cognitive mechanisms underlying observational movement analysis and to improve injury risk assessment performance

A pedagogic appraisal of the Priority Heuristic

We have explored how science and mathematics teachers made decisions when confronted with a dilemma in which a fictitious young woman, Deborah, may choose to have an operation that might address a painful spinal condition. We sought to explore the extent to which psychological heuristic models, in particular the Priority Heuristic, might successfully describe the decision-making process of these teachers and how an analysis of the role of personal and emotional factors in shaping the decision-making process might inform pedagogical design. A novel aspect of this study is that the setting in which the decision-making process is examined contrasts sharply with those used in psychological experiments. We found that to some extent, even in this contrasting setting, the Priority Heuristic could describe these teachers' decision-making. Further analysis of the transcripts yielded some insights into limitations on scope as well the richness and complexity in how personal factors were brought to bear. We see these limitations as design opportunities for educational intervention

The role of intuition in entrepreneurship and business venturing decisions

Entrepreneurial intuition is the affectively charged recognition and evaluation of a business venturing opportunity arising as a result of involuntary, rapid, non-conscious, associative processing. This article integrates theories of dual-processing and models of the business venturing (opportunity recognition, evaluation, and exploitation) in a model of entrepreneurial intuition, which links intuitive expertise, cognitive style, somatic state, and the affect heuristic with System 2 interventions and the contingencies of the decision environment. Six research propositions are offered with suggestions for how they can be tested. The theoretical and practical implications of entrepreneurial intuition are discussed in terms of the unfolding of a research agenda relating to this important but under-theorized and under-researched construct in work and organizational psychology

Does the cognitive reflection test measure cognitive reflection? A mathematical modeling approach

We used a mathematical modeling approach, based on a sample of 2,019 participants, to better understand what the cognitive reflection test (CRT; Frederick In Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 25–42, 2005) measures. This test, which is typically completed in less than 10 min, contains three problems and aims to measure the ability or disposition to resist reporting the response that first comes to mind. However, since the test contains three mathematically based problems, it is possible that the test only measures mathematical abilities, and not cognitive reflection. We found that the models that included an inhibition parameter (i.e., the probability of inhibiting an intuitive response), as well as a mathematical parameter (i.e., the probability of using an adequate mathematical procedure), fitted the data better than a model that only included a mathematical parameter. We also found that the inhibition parameter in males is best explained by both rational thinking ability and the disposition toward actively open-minded thinking, whereas in females this parameter was better explained by rational thinking only. With these findings, this study contributes to the understanding of the processes involved in solving the CRT, and will be particularly useful for researchers who are considering using this test in their research

The Illogicality of Stock-Brokers: Psychological Experiments on the Effects of Prior Knowledge and Belief Biases on Logical Reasoning in Stock Trading

BACKGROUND: Explanations for the current worldwide financial crisis are primarily provided by economists and politicians. However, in the present work we focus on the psychological-cognitive factors that most likely affect the thinking of people on the economic stage and thus might also have had an effect on the progression of the crises. One of these factors might be the effect of prior beliefs on reasoning and decision-making. So far, this question has been explored only to a limited extent. METHODS: We report two experiments on logical reasoning competences of nineteen stock-brokers with long-lasting vocational experiences at the stock market. The premises of reasoning problems concerned stock trading and the experiments varied whether or not their conclusions--a proposition which is reached after considering the premises--agreed with the brokers' prior beliefs. Half of the problems had a conclusion that was highly plausible for stock-brokers while the other half had a highly implausible conclusion. RESULTS: The data show a strong belief bias. Stock-brokers were strongly biased by their prior knowledge. Lowest performance was found for inferences in which the problems caused a conflict between logical validity and the experts' belief. In these cases, the stock-brokers tended to make logically invalid inferences rather than give up their existing beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the thesis that cognitive factors have an effect on the decision-making on the financial market. In the present study, stock-brokers were guided more by past experience and existing beliefs than by logical thinking and rational decision-making. They had difficulties to disengage themselves from vastly anchored thinking patterns. However, we believe, that it is wrong to accuse the brokers for their "malfunctions", because such hard-wired cognitive principles are difficult to suppress even if the person is aware of them

Affective Reactions Influence Investment Decisions: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment With Taxation

We investigate the effect of taxation on gains and losses on the investment behavior of investors. Based on the insights of both economic research on the influence of taxation on investment behavior and psychological concepts dealing with the descriptive decision behavior of investors we expect investors to react to taxation of investment alternatives they face with behavioral and affective changes. By conducting a laboratory experiment with a total of 72 participants based on the experimental design of Fochmann, Kiesewetter, and Sadrieh (2012) that allows to quantify the reactions of investors to taxation on gains and loss deduction independent of their individual risk preferences and additionally measuring the affective reactions of our participants, we explore the role of affect in the relation of taxation and decision making. Hence, we are able to show that affective reactions to the taxation situations, in particular the perceived valence of these situations, influence the change in behavior of investors when confronted with taxation on gains and limited loss deduction