Deliberate solitude for clinical reasoning
-
Eulho Jung
,
Feng-Chih Kuo
und
Steven J. Durning
Abstract
While modern medicine emphasizes teamwork, expert performance in clinical reasoning may require periods of deliberate solitude to refine intuition, enhance diagnostic and/or management accuracy, and mitigate potential cognitive biases. Evidence from cognitive psychology, philosophy, and education suggests that cognitive withdrawal supports deep learning and problem-solving, yet its role in clinical reasoning learning and performance remains underexplored. Medicine often prioritizes speed and real-time collaboration, potentially limiting opportunities for independent time for thought. This article explores whether deliberate solitude could support the development and performance of clinical reasoning. Clinicians might consider engaging in diagnostic rehearsal, independent synthesis, and/or cognitive withdrawal during these solitary moments, but the specific opportunities and benefits remain uncertain. By drawing from research in other disciplines, we consider how solitude might help physicians refine their clinical reasoning, which, in turn, could potentially reduce errors. While no specific course of action can yet be made, this conceptual perspective suggests potential directions for future inquiry.
-
Research ethics: Not applicable.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.
-
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: None declared.
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
References
1. Ericsson, KA. The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In: Ericsson, KA, Charness, N, Feltovich, PJ, Hoffman, RR, editors. The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006:683–703 pp.10.1017/CBO9780511816796.038Suche in Google Scholar
2. Mamede, S, Schmidt, HG, Rikers, RMJP. Diagnostic errors and reflective practice in medicine. J Eval Clin Pract 2008;14:727–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01007.x.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Long, CR, Averill, JR. Solitude: an exploration of benefits of being alone. J Theor Soc Behav 2003;33:21–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00204.Suche in Google Scholar
4. Mamede, S, Schmidt, HG, Rikers, RM, Penaforte, JC, Coelho-Filho, JM. Breaking down automaticity: case ambiguity and the shift to reflective approaches in clinical reasoning. Med Educ 2007;41:1185–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02921.x.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
5. Newport, C. Deep work: rules for focused success in a distracted world. London, UK: Hachette; 2016.Suche in Google Scholar
6. Croskerry, P. From mindless to mindful practice: cognitive bias and clinical decision making. N Engl J Med 2013;368:2445–8. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp1303712.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
7. Norman, GR, Monteiro, SD, Sherbino, J, Ilgen, JS, Schmidt, HG, Mamede, S. The causes of errors in clinical reasoning: cognitive biases, knowledge deficits, and dual process thinking. Acad Med 2017;92:23–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000001421.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
8. Storr, A. Solitude: a return to the self. New York: Free Press; 1988.Suche in Google Scholar
9. Kahneman, D. Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2011.Suche in Google Scholar
10. Vadillo, MA, Kostopoulou, O, Shanks, DR. A critical review and meta-analysis of the unconscious thought effect in medical decision making. Front Psychol 2015;6:636. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00636.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
11. Dahlberg, I. Knowledge organization and terminology: philosophical and linguistic bases. Knowl Organ 1992;19:65–70.Suche in Google Scholar
12. Hjørland, B. Fundamentals of knowledge organization. Knowl Organ 2003;30:87–111.Suche in Google Scholar
13. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Achieving hospital-wide patient flow, 2nd ed. Boston (MA): Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2000. (IHI White Paper).Suche in Google Scholar
14. Heip, T, Schepers, K, De Wit, K, Sleiman, A, Matey, N, Lim, D, et al.. The effects of interdisciplinary bedside rounds on patient-centeredness, quality of care, and team collaboration. BMJ Open Qual 2020;11:e002045. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-002045.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
15. Stange, KC. The problem of fragmentation and the need for integrative solutions. Ann Fam Med 2009;7:100–3. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.971.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
16. Raichle, ME. The brain’s default mode network. Annu Rev Neurosci 2015;38:433–47. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-071013-014030.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
17. Nguyen, TT, Ryan, RM, Deci, EL. Solitude as an approach to affective self-regulation. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2018;44:92–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217733073.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
18. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row; 1990.Suche in Google Scholar
19. Donker, SCM, Vorstenbosch, MATM, Gerhardus, MJT, Thijssen, DHJ. Retrieval practice and spaced learning: preventing loss of knowledge in Dutch medical sciences students in an ecologically valid setting. BMC Med Educ 2022;22:65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-03075-y.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
20. Ericsson, KA, Kintsch, W. Long-term working memory. Psychol Rev 1995;102:211–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.21.Suche in Google Scholar
21. Schmidt, HG, Boshuizen, HP. On acquiring expertise in medicine. Educ Psychol Rev 1993;5:205–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01321734.Suche in Google Scholar
22. Burger, JM. Individual differences in preference for solitude. J Res Pers 1995;29:85–108. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1995.1005.Suche in Google Scholar
23. Gonullu, I, Artar, M. Metacognition in medical education. Educ Health 2014;27:225–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/1357-6283.143784.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
24. Thomas, V, Balzer Carr, B, Azmitia, M, Whittaker, S. Alone and online: understanding the relationships between social media, solitude, and psychological adjustment. Psychol Pop Media 2021;10:201–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000287.Suche in Google Scholar
25. Velleman, JD. Sociality and solitude. Philos Explor 2013;16:324–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13869795.2013.767931.Suche in Google Scholar
26. Nashwan, AJ, Alsalamah, YS, Abu-Mahfouz, MS, Palanivelu, P, Masoud, A, Baker, RA, et al.. Resilience in solitude: a review of loneliness and its impact on nurses’ wellbeing. Psychiatr Care 2024;1:5225026. https://doi.org/10.1155/ppc/5225026.Suche in Google Scholar
27. Bringedal, B, Isaksson Ro, K, Magelssen, M, Førde, R, Aasland, OG. Between professional values, social regulations and patient preferences. Medical doctors’ perceptions of ethical dilemmas. J Med Ethics 2018;44:239–43. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2017-104408.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
28. Prendergast, M, Cardoso Pinto, AM, Harvey, CJ, Muir, E. Burnout in early year medical students experiences drivers and the perceived value of a reflection-based intervention. BMC Med Educ 2024;24:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04948-0.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
29. Choe, MS, Huffman, LC, Feldman, HM, Hubner, LM. Academic half-day education experience in post-graduate medical training. Front Med 2022;9:1–9.10.3389/fmed.2022.835045Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
30. Hedges, C, Hunt, C, Ball, P. Quiet time improves the patient experience. J Nurs Care Qual 2019;34:197–202. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncq.0000000000000363.Suche in Google Scholar
31. Lee, JY, Szulewski, A, Young, JQ, Donkers, J, Jarodzka, H, van Merriënboer, JJG. The medical pause. Med Educ 2021;55:1152–60.10.1111/medu.14529Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
32. Sloane, JF, Donkin, C, Newell, BR, Singh, H, Meyer, AND. Managing interruptions to improve diagnostic decision-making. J Gen Intern Med 2023;38:1526–31.10.1007/s11606-022-08019-wSuche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
33. Ackerman, R, Bernstein, DM, Kumar, R. Metacognitive hindsight bias. Mem Cognit 2020;48:731–44. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-020-01012-w.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
34. Rencic, J, Schuwirth, LW, Gruppen, LD, Durning, SJ. A situated cognition model for clinical reasoning performance assessment: a narrative review. Diagnosis (Berl). 2020;7:227–40. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2019-0103.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
35. Finnesgard, EJ, Aho, JM, Pandian, TK, Farley, DR. Effect of rehearsal modality on knowledge retention in surgical trainees: a pilot study. J Surg Educ 2016;73:831–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.04.001.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
36. Durning, S, Artino, ARJr, Pangaro, L, van der Vleuten, CP, Schuwirth, L. Context and clinical reasoning: understanding the perspective of the expert’s voice. Med Educ 2011;45:927–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04053.x.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
37. Durning, SJ, Artino, AR, Boulet, JR, Dorrance, K, van der Vleuten, C, Schuwirth, L. The impact of selected contextual factors on experts’ clinical reasoning performance: does context impact clinical reasoning performance in experts? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2012;17:65–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9294-x.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
