Table 6. Participants’ decisions and probability judgments for the 10 decision scenarios in Study 2 in which the posterior probability of both diseases according to a Bayesian analysis was 0.50 (i.e., the posterior probabilities predicted an indifference situation between both diseases).

Scenario	Previous diagnosis	Private information favors	Participants’ diagnosis according to their private information (%)	Participants’ average probability judgment	Average proportion of decisions according to private information	Average probability judgment
Baseline Scenarios (no previous decision of the MD)
31	AP: A	S	70.0	0.62
32	AP: A, AP: S; AP: S	A	40.0	0.63	0.57	0.63
33	AP: A; AP: S; AP: A	S	60.0	0.66
Scenarios where the decision of the MD favored participants’ private information
34	MD: A, AP: S; AP: S	A	75.0	0.68	0.67	0.69
35	AP: A; MD: S, AP: A	S	60.0	0.69
Scenarios where the decision of the MD spoke against participants’ private information
36	MD: A	S	37.5	0.62
37	AP: A, MD: S; AP: S	A	40.0	0.63
38	AP: A, AP: S; MD: S	A	30.0	0.66	0.39	0.65
39	MD: A; AP: S; AP: A	S	47.5	0.66
40	AP: A; AP: S; MD: A	S	37.5	0.68

Note. AP = Assistant physician; MD = medical director; A = appendicitis; S = sigmoid diverticulitis.