Choosing between the red and the blue pill. How do people decide when they face uncertainty regarding different treatment alternatives?

Background: When we are faced with health challenges, we have to choose a treatment from several alternatives. Most of the time, we must make a choice even though some information regarding the options is missing. Previous research found that missing information systematically impacts our choices. Aim: The present study investigated if context-related variables (type of information: advantages or costs, the label of the alternatives) and individual differences (moral purity, thinking style) have an impact on the way people make these kinds of choices. Methods: One hundred twenty-three students (52% males) had to make 27 decisions regarding their preferred alternative for treating various medical conditions. We manipulated the type of comparable information (i.e., regarding advantages, disadvantages, or costs), and the label of the treatment alternatives (i.e., abstract vs. recognizabletreatments). Additionally, we measured the participants' moral purity endorsement and thinking style via self-report questionnaires. Results: The results showed that context variables like the type of comparable information and the label of the alternatives are significant predictors of people's medical treatment choices. At the same time, self-reported measures were unrelated to the way people choose medical treatment. Conclusion: The results highlight the importance of discussing the issue of missing information with healthcare consumers and patients.