Information overload within the health care system: a literature review

There is a widespread view held by health clinicians that their work effectiveness is impaired by 'information overload.' Building upon a previous work by Wilson, a review of the literature was undertaken to look for the evidence of this. It was found that the literature, particularly in the context of the clinical environment, was limited. This review explores the diverse overarching theories of information overload, effects of the phenomenon that are perceived to occur and proposed solutions to this problem. Many of the papers noted an information explosion but only three authors explicitly attempted to measure both the quantity and the complexity of this information. It was also found that the typology of the information studied was severely limited with most studies exploring information such as guidelines, access to journals, research findings and other knowledge intensive areas. Solutions proposed seem to concentrate on technological means rather than exploring the use of humans either in management of information or as a step in the filtering process.     

MODELS OF EVALUATION AND THEIR RELATION TO STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS

The union and disjunction models for combining individual test marks to yield final grade distributions were outlined. It was expected that these models would differentially favor students according to their characteristic methods of learning and studying. The models were examined empirically in two educational psychology classes; five performance assessments were available, as well as eleven dimensions of study behavior and academic attitudes. While there was a substantial correlation between the distributions derived from the two models, they were found significantly to favor different student characteristics. The union model, relative to the disjunction model, favored students who were dependent, who interrelated different aspects of their course work, who scheduled their work and who rote-learned material. These differences were interpreted in terms of the educational assumptions underlying the two models. Some implications of the study for grading practice were suggested.