Premium
Propositional Versus Structural Semantic Analyses of Medical Diagnostic Thinking
Author(s) -
Lemieux Madeleine,
Bordage Georges
Publication year - 1992
Publication title -
cognitive science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.498
H-Index - 114
eISSN - 1551-6709
pISSN - 0364-0213
DOI - 10.1207/s15516709cog1602_2
Subject(s) - representation (politics) , dimension (graph theory) , meaning (existential) , semantic network , semantic memory , set (abstract data type) , computer science , artificial intelligence , epistemology , natural language processing , psychology , mathematics , philosophy , cognition , pure mathematics , neuroscience , politics , political science , law , programming language
Two approaches to the study of diagnostic thinking are compared, one mainly propositional, namely that of Patel and Groen (1986), the other mainly semantic, that of Lemieux and Bordage (1986). Patel and Groen analyzed the linear dimension of cardiologists' discourses while solving a case of acute bacterial endocarditis, that is, the before and after propositional rules. A secondary analysis of two of their pothophysiological protocols is done using structural semantic techniques from Lemieux and Bordage where the vertical dimension of the discourses is analyzed, that is, the levels of meaning or semantic axes. Contrary to Patel and Groen's position, making an accurate diagnosis is not explained in terms of pure forward reasoning through networks of causal rules, but by means of networks of semantic qualities abstracted from the symptoms and signs. The semantic qualities operate in the clinician's mind in terms of binary oppositions (e.g., sudden‐gradual, unilateral‐bilateral) whereby each pair of properties constitutes a semantic axis (e.g., sudden‐gradual). The successful diagnosticians are those who use the most diversified and pertinent set of semantic axes and, therefore, have a deeper representation of the problem.