Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42339241›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cognition2025

Assessing judges' use and awareness of cognitive heuristic decision-making.

Amaryllis-Chryssi Malegiannaki, Athanasios Chatzopoulos, Konstantinos Tsagkaridis

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Amaryllis-Chryssi MalegiannakiDepartment of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece.
Athanasios ChatzopoulosDepartment of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece.
Konstantinos TsagkaridisDepartment of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heuristics, characterized as concise cognitive shortcuts rooted in intuitive reasoning, are both capable of facilitating swift judgments and cognitive efficiency, but also introducing cognitive biases during decision-making. The judicial domain, renowned for its demanding decision-making processes, is an interesting field for studying heuristics. In this study, we developed a novel Judicial Heuristics Assessment Questionnaire (J-HAQ) and administered it to a sample of 52 judges (20 males, M

Indexed as

assessmentawarenesscognitive biasdecision-makingheuristicsjudicialmetacognitionreflective thinking

Identifiers

PMID42339241
PMCPMC13281065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.