Episode 3: Why Fuzzy Mental Models Undermine Clinical Trial Execution

A well-written protocol does not guarantee a shared understanding of how to execute it.

Clinical trial professionals rarely approach a new study with a blank slate. They bring years of experience, familiar workflows, and assumptions from prior protocols. Those mental models help people work efficiently, but they can also create hidden risk when what feels familiar is subtly different in the trial in front of them.

In Episode 3 of The Human Side of Clinical Trials, Brian S. McGowan, PhD, FACEHP, chief learning officer and co-founder of ArcheMedX, and Kelly Ritch, MS, MBA, chief operating officer of ArcheMedX, are joined by Jason Riis, PhD, CEO and chief behavioral scientist at Behavioralize, to explore how these “fuzzy mental models” can undermine trial execution.

The conversation examines why familiarity can be mistaken for understanding, how protocol complexity and site burden amplify the problem, and why simply exposing someone to more information does not necessarily create clarity.

They also explore practical ways sponsors and CROs can design for how people actually think and learn, including surfacing unusual or critical requirements earlier, testing understanding under more realistic conditions, and giving learners opportunities to actively explain and apply what they know.

Because the goal is not simply to communicate the protocol.

It is to help every person responsible for executing it build the right mental model before assumptions become mistakes.

You can listen, share, and subscribe to the podcast here:

1. Applied Clinical Trial website
2. Apple podcasts
3. Spotify podcasts