Cognitive biases in nursing students' clinical decision-making: insights from high-fidelity simulation using think-aloud and observational methods

Background Cognitive biases are systematic errors in human reasoning that can compromise clinical decision-making (CDM) in healthcare. While extensively studied in medicine, nursing research on cognitive biases in CDM remains limited. Aim This study aimed to explore and identify cognitive biases and examine their relationship with nursing students' clinical decision-making during a high-fidelity simulation of a deteriorating patient scenario. Design A mixed-methods design was employed, incorporating concurrent and retrospective think-aloud (TA) protocols and observational data. Methods Twenty-three final-year Bachelor of Science nursing students participated in a high-fidelity, manikin-based simulation involving a clinically deteriorating patient scenario. A catalogue of 12 cognitive biases was developed from the literature and used to code statements from concurrent and retrospective think-aloud protocols and observational data using content analysis. Results A total of 166 bias occurrences were identified across all data sources (63 concurrent TA; 51 retrospective TA; 52 observation). Representativeness was the most frequently identified bias overall, particularly in retrospective think-aloud data. Order effect was the most common bias in concurrent think-aloud data, and representativeness and order effect were the most common in observational data. Premature closure and availability were also prominent across all sources of data. Biases occurred proportionally across both Type 1 (automated/pattern recognition) and Type 2 (hypothetico-deductive) decision-making, with notable differences between concurrent and retrospective think-aloud findings. The findings also suggest that simulation may support students' awareness of cognitive bias. Conclusion High-fidelity simulation, combined with think-aloud protocols and observation, provided a useful approach for identifying cognitive biases in nursing students' clinical decision-making. The findings have implications for simulation design, debriefing practice, and nursing education.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Medicine
Published
2026-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2026.1984162
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cognitive biases in nursing students' clinical decision-making: insights from high-fidelity simulation using think-aloud and observational methods

Naim Abdulmohdi
Frontiers in Medicine
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

Cognitive biases in nursing students' clinical decision-making: insights from high-fidelity simulation using think-aloud and observational methods

Naim Abdulmohdi
article en

Abstract

Background Cognitive biases are systematic errors in human reasoning that can compromise clinical decision-making (CDM) in healthcare. While extensively studied in medicine, nursing research on cognitive biases in CDM remains limited. Aim This study aimed to explore and identify cognitive biases and examine their relationship with nursing students' clinical decision-making during a high-fidelity simulation of a deteriorating patient scenario. Design A mixed-methods design was employed, incorporating concurrent and retrospective think-aloud (TA) protocols and observational data. Methods Twenty-three final-year Bachelor of Science nursing students participated in a high-fidelity, manikin-based simulation involving a clinically deteriorating patient scenario. A catalogue of 12 cognitive biases was developed from the literature and used to code statements from concurrent and retrospective think-aloud protocols and observational data using content analysis. Results A total of 166 bias occurrences were identified across all data sources (63 concurrent TA; 51 retrospective TA; 52 observation). Representativeness was the most frequently identified bias overall, particularly in retrospective think-aloud data. Order effect was the most common bias in concurrent think-aloud data, and representativeness and order effect were the most common in observational data. Premature closure and availability were also prominent across all sources of data. Biases occurred proportionally across both Type 1 (automated/pattern recognition) and Type 2 (hypothetico-deductive) decision-making, with notable differences between concurrent and retrospective think-aloud findings. The findings also suggest that simulation may support students' awareness of cognitive bias. Conclusion High-fidelity simulation, combined with think-aloud protocols and observation, provided a useful approach for identifying cognitive biases in nursing students' clinical decision-making. The findings have implications for simulation design, debriefing practice, and nursing education.

Frontiers in MedicineVol. 13
Anglia Ruskin University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon
Cognitive biases in nursing students' clinical decision-making: insights from high-fidelity simulation using think-aloud and observational methods — Naim Abdulmohdi · Frontiers in Medicine (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS