PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
The effectiveness of policymakers\' decision-making in times of crisis depends largely on their ability to integrate and make sense of information. The COVID-19 crisis confronts governments with the difficult task of making decisions in the interest of public health and safety. Essentially, policymakers have to react to a threat, of which the extent is unknown, and they are making decisions under time constraints in the midst of immense uncertainty. The stakes are high, the issues involved are complex and require the careful balancing of several interests, including (mental) health, the economy, and human rights. These circumstances render policymakers\' decision-making processes vulnerable to errors and biases in the processing of information, thereby increasing the chances of faulty decision-making processes with poor outcomes. Prior research has identified three main information-processing failures that can distort group decision-making processes and can lead to negative outcomes: (1) failure to search for and share information, (2) failure to elaborate on and analyze information that is not in line with earlier information and (3) failure to revise and update conclusions and policies in the light of new information. To date, it has not yet been explored how errors and biases underlying these information-processing failures impact decision-making processes in times of crisis. In this narrative review, we outline how groupthink, a narrow focus on the problem of containing the virus, and escalation of commitment may pose real risks to decision-making processes in handling the COVID-19 crisis and may result in widespread societal damages. Hence, it is vital that policymakers take steps to maximize the quality of the decision-making process and increase the chances of positive outcomes as the crisis goes forward. We propose group reflexivity-a deliberate process of discussing team goals, processes, or outcomes-as an antidote to these biases and errors in decision-making. Specifically, we recommend several evidence-based reflexivity tools that could easily be implemented to counter these information-processing errors and improve decision-making processes in uncertain times.
摘要：
危机时期决策者决策的有效性在很大程度上取决于他们整合和理解信息的能力。COVID-19危机使政府面临艰巨的任务，即为公共卫生和安全做出决策。本质上,决策者必须对威胁做出反应，其程度是未知的，他们在巨大的不确定性中，在时间限制下做出决定。赌注很高，所涉及的问题很复杂，需要仔细平衡几个利益，包括（精神）健康，经济,和人权。这些情况使决策者的决策过程容易受到信息处理中的错误和偏见的影响，从而增加了结果不佳的错误决策过程的机会。先前的研究已经确定了三个主要的信息处理失败，这些失败会扭曲群体决策过程并可能导致负面结果：（1）未能搜索和共享信息，（2）未详细说明和分析与先前信息不符的信息；（3）未根据新信息修改和更新结论和政策。迄今为止,目前还没有探讨这些信息处理失败背后的错误和偏见如何影响危机时期的决策过程。在这篇叙述性评论中，我们概述了群体思维，狭隘地关注遏制病毒的问题，承诺的升级可能对处理COVID-19危机的决策过程构成真正的风险，并可能导致广泛的社会损害。因此，至关重要的是，决策者应采取措施，最大限度地提高决策过程的质量，并随着危机的发展增加取得积极成果的机会。我们提出了群体反身性——一个讨论团队目标的深思熟虑的过程，进程,或结果-作为解决这些决策中的偏见和错误的解毒剂。具体来说,我们推荐几种基于证据的反身性工具,这些工具可以很容易地实施,以应对这些信息处理错误,并改善不确定时期的决策过程.
