The limits of checklists: Handoff and narrative thinking

Brian Hilligoss, Susan D. Moffatt-Bruce

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Concerns about the role of communication failures in adverse events coupled with the success of checklists in addressing safety hazards have engendered a movement to apply structured tools to a wide variety of clinical communication practices. While standardised, structured approaches are appropriate for certain activities, their usefulness diminishes considerably for practices that entail constructing rich understandings of complex situations and the handling of ambiguities and unpredictable variation. Drawing on a prominent social science theory of cognition, this article distinguishes between two radically different modes of human thought, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. The paradigmatic mode organises context-free knowledge into categorical hierarchies that emphasise member-to-category relations in order to apply universal truth conditions. The narrative mode, on the other hand, organises context-sensitive knowledge into temporal plots that emphasise part-to-whole relations in order to develop meaningful, holistic understandings of particular events or identities. Both modes are crucial to human cognition but are appropriate responses for different kinds of tasks and situations. Many communication-intensive practices in which patient cases are communicated, such as handoffs, rely heavily on the narrative mode, yet most interventions assume the paradigmatic mode. Improving the safety and effectiveness of these practices, therefore, necessitates greater attention to narrative thinking.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)528-533
Number of pages6
JournalBMJ Quality and Safety
Volume23
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Checklist
Communication
Cognition
Safety
Social Sciences
Thinking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

The limits of checklists : Handoff and narrative thinking. / Hilligoss, Brian; Moffatt-Bruce, Susan D.

In: BMJ Quality and Safety, Vol. 23, No. 7, 07.2014, p. 528-533.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Hilligoss, Brian ; Moffatt-Bruce, Susan D. / The limits of checklists : Handoff and narrative thinking. In: BMJ Quality and Safety. 2014 ; Vol. 23, No. 7. pp. 528-533.
@article{fd2aef9e61a440589fd216b48ff531a6,
title = "The limits of checklists: Handoff and narrative thinking",
abstract = "Concerns about the role of communication failures in adverse events coupled with the success of checklists in addressing safety hazards have engendered a movement to apply structured tools to a wide variety of clinical communication practices. While standardised, structured approaches are appropriate for certain activities, their usefulness diminishes considerably for practices that entail constructing rich understandings of complex situations and the handling of ambiguities and unpredictable variation. Drawing on a prominent social science theory of cognition, this article distinguishes between two radically different modes of human thought, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. The paradigmatic mode organises context-free knowledge into categorical hierarchies that emphasise member-to-category relations in order to apply universal truth conditions. The narrative mode, on the other hand, organises context-sensitive knowledge into temporal plots that emphasise part-to-whole relations in order to develop meaningful, holistic understandings of particular events or identities. Both modes are crucial to human cognition but are appropriate responses for different kinds of tasks and situations. Many communication-intensive practices in which patient cases are communicated, such as handoffs, rely heavily on the narrative mode, yet most interventions assume the paradigmatic mode. Improving the safety and effectiveness of these practices, therefore, necessitates greater attention to narrative thinking.",
author = "Brian Hilligoss and Moffatt-Bruce, {Susan D.}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002705",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "528--533",
journal = "BMJ Quality and Safety",
issn = "2044-5415",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The limits of checklists

T2 - Handoff and narrative thinking

AU - Hilligoss, Brian

AU - Moffatt-Bruce, Susan D.

PY - 2014/7

Y1 - 2014/7

N2 - Concerns about the role of communication failures in adverse events coupled with the success of checklists in addressing safety hazards have engendered a movement to apply structured tools to a wide variety of clinical communication practices. While standardised, structured approaches are appropriate for certain activities, their usefulness diminishes considerably for practices that entail constructing rich understandings of complex situations and the handling of ambiguities and unpredictable variation. Drawing on a prominent social science theory of cognition, this article distinguishes between two radically different modes of human thought, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. The paradigmatic mode organises context-free knowledge into categorical hierarchies that emphasise member-to-category relations in order to apply universal truth conditions. The narrative mode, on the other hand, organises context-sensitive knowledge into temporal plots that emphasise part-to-whole relations in order to develop meaningful, holistic understandings of particular events or identities. Both modes are crucial to human cognition but are appropriate responses for different kinds of tasks and situations. Many communication-intensive practices in which patient cases are communicated, such as handoffs, rely heavily on the narrative mode, yet most interventions assume the paradigmatic mode. Improving the safety and effectiveness of these practices, therefore, necessitates greater attention to narrative thinking.

AB - Concerns about the role of communication failures in adverse events coupled with the success of checklists in addressing safety hazards have engendered a movement to apply structured tools to a wide variety of clinical communication practices. While standardised, structured approaches are appropriate for certain activities, their usefulness diminishes considerably for practices that entail constructing rich understandings of complex situations and the handling of ambiguities and unpredictable variation. Drawing on a prominent social science theory of cognition, this article distinguishes between two radically different modes of human thought, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. The paradigmatic mode organises context-free knowledge into categorical hierarchies that emphasise member-to-category relations in order to apply universal truth conditions. The narrative mode, on the other hand, organises context-sensitive knowledge into temporal plots that emphasise part-to-whole relations in order to develop meaningful, holistic understandings of particular events or identities. Both modes are crucial to human cognition but are appropriate responses for different kinds of tasks and situations. Many communication-intensive practices in which patient cases are communicated, such as handoffs, rely heavily on the narrative mode, yet most interventions assume the paradigmatic mode. Improving the safety and effectiveness of these practices, therefore, necessitates greater attention to narrative thinking.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84902466315&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84902466315&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002705

DO - 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-002705

M3 - Review article

C2 - 24694362

AN - SCOPUS:84902466315

VL - 23

SP - 528

EP - 533

JO - BMJ Quality and Safety

JF - BMJ Quality and Safety

SN - 2044-5415

IS - 7

ER -