TY - JOUR
T1 - Exploring the Boundaries of Deception in Simulation
T2 - A Mixed-Methods Study
AU - Calhoun, Aaron
AU - Pian-Smith, May
AU - Shah, Anjan
AU - Levine, Adam
AU - Gaba, David
AU - DeMaria, Samuel
AU - Goldberg, Andrew
AU - Meyer, Elaine C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning
PY - 2020/3
Y1 - 2020/3
N2 - Background: Deception can be defined as causing someone to accept a falsehood as true. Within simulation, a deception is an aspect of the environment for which there is no clear agreement or knowledge among facilitators and learners about its ground rules, boundaries, or existence. The psychological literature surrounding deception is mixed, and little simulation-specific research exists. Methods: This mixed-methods survey-based research explored attitudes for and against deception's use and facilitator perceptions of psychological risk and ethical harm. Subjects consisted of a random sample of members from three international simulation societies that included nurses, physicians, standardized patients, and educational specialists. The survey was designed and tested using an iterative process and distributed using SurveyMonkey™. Descriptive statistics and thematic analyses were performed. Results: Eighty-four (11%) of surveys were completed. Thirty-three percent of respondents currently use modification/deception, whereas 61 to 75% of respondents expressed psychological and ethical concerns. Thematic analysis yielded five themes: types of modification/deception, decision-making considerations and guardrails, never events (high risk), potential detriments, and potential benefits. Conclusions: The use of deception appears relatively prevalent in the simulation community, but significant concerns also exist. Careful consideration of all relevant factors is needed if deception is to be used responsibly.
AB - Background: Deception can be defined as causing someone to accept a falsehood as true. Within simulation, a deception is an aspect of the environment for which there is no clear agreement or knowledge among facilitators and learners about its ground rules, boundaries, or existence. The psychological literature surrounding deception is mixed, and little simulation-specific research exists. Methods: This mixed-methods survey-based research explored attitudes for and against deception's use and facilitator perceptions of psychological risk and ethical harm. Subjects consisted of a random sample of members from three international simulation societies that included nurses, physicians, standardized patients, and educational specialists. The survey was designed and tested using an iterative process and distributed using SurveyMonkey™. Descriptive statistics and thematic analyses were performed. Results: Eighty-four (11%) of surveys were completed. Thirty-three percent of respondents currently use modification/deception, whereas 61 to 75% of respondents expressed psychological and ethical concerns. Thematic analysis yielded five themes: types of modification/deception, decision-making considerations and guardrails, never events (high risk), potential detriments, and potential benefits. Conclusions: The use of deception appears relatively prevalent in the simulation community, but significant concerns also exist. Careful consideration of all relevant factors is needed if deception is to be used responsibly.
KW - deception
KW - education
KW - emotionally challenging
KW - ethics
KW - modification
KW - pedagogy
KW - psychological safety
KW - simulation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077651984&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecns.2019.12.004
DO - 10.1016/j.ecns.2019.12.004
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85077651984
SN - 1876-1399
VL - 40
SP - 7
EP - 16
JO - Clinical Simulation in Nursing
JF - Clinical Simulation in Nursing
ER -