Forecasting and Ethical Decision Making: What Matters?

This study examined how the number and types of consequences considered are related to forecasting and ethical decision making. Undergraduate participants took on the role of the key actor in several ethical problems and were asked to forecast potential outcomes and make a decision about each problem. Performance pressure was manipulated by ostensibly making rewards contingent on good problem-solving performance. The results indicated that forecast quality was associated with decision ethicality, and the identification of the critical consequences of the problem and consequences for others were associated with both higher quality forecasts and more ethical decisions. In addition, the identification of a larger number of consequences was negatively associated with ethical decision making. Performance pressure did not impact forecast quality or ethicality of decisions. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Can Constructive Thinking Predict Decision Making?

We assume that executive function constitutes an integrated set of cognitive processes that mediate working memory, planning, inhibition, flexibility, and decision making. Despite the acknowledged theoretical connection between executive function processes and emotional intelligence, such relationships have rarely been investigated. The purpose of this study was to examine the potential relationship between constructive thinking, conceived as a component of emotional intelligence, and executive function, as indexed by various existing neuropsychological and experimental instruments. We used the Constructive Thinking Inventory as a measure of emotional intelligence. We found that some constructive thinking subscales were able to predict distinct executive function variables. Emotional Coping, Categorical Thinking, and Esoteric Thinking subscales explained performance on various measures of executive function. Thus, we conclude that intervention programs designed to train a specific component of emotional intelligence, namely constructive thinking, could also facilitate performance in executive function processes, and vice versa. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How Can Decision Making Be Improved?

ABSTRACT— The optimal moment to address the question of how to improve human decision making has arrived. Thanks to 50 years of research by judgment and decision-making scholars, psychologists have developed a detailed picture of the ways in which human judgment is bounded. This article argues that the time has come to focus attention on the search for strategies that will improve bounded judgment because decision-making errors are costly and are growing more costly, decision makers are receptive, and academic insights are sure to follow from research on improvement. In addition to calling for research on improvement strategies, this article organizes the existing literature pertaining to improvement strategies and highlights promising directions for future research.     

Does Anxiety Improve Voters' Decision Making?

Affective Intelligence (AI) theory proposes to answer a fundamental question about democracy: how it succeeds even though most citizens pay little attention to politics. AI contends that, when circumstances generate sufficient anxiety, citizens make informed and thoughtful political decisions. In Ladd and Lenz (2008 ), we showed that two simpler depictions of anxiety's role can explain the vote interactions that apparently support AI. Here, we again replicate Marcus, Neuman and MacKuen's (2000 )'s voting model, which they contend supports AI, and again show that it is vulnerable to these alternative explanations, regardless of how candidate choice is measured. We also briefly review the broader literature and discuss Brader's (2005, 2006 ) important experimental results. Although the literature undoubtedly supports other aspects of AI, few studies directly test AI's voting claims, which were the focus of our reassessment. In our view, the only study that does so while ruling out the two alternatives is our analysis of the 1980 ANES Major Panel ( Ladd & Lenz, 2008 ), which finds no support for AI, but ample support for the alternatives. None of the responses to Ladd and Lenz (2008 ) addresses these findings. Overall, evidence that anxiety helps solve the problem of voter competence remains sparse and vulnerable to alternative explanations.     

Education and the Importance of Religion in Decision Making: Do Other Dimensions of Religiousness Matter?

The relationship between education and the importance of religion in everyday decision making is examined using data from two national surveys of American adults. People who have higher levels of education are less likely to rely on the Bible and the teachings of their place of worship for guidance in their decision making. However, previously undocumented contingencies attenuate the effect of education: (1) attending religious services regularly; (2) involvement in religious activities; (3) praying more frequently; (4) believing in the literal interpretation of the Bible; and (5) greater certainty in one's personal faith. These patterns hold net of income, which is also negatively associated with religious‐based decision making—and only the socially integrative aspects of religiousness attenuate that association.     

A Counseling Paradox: Do Preservice Counselors Need Employment Counseling?

Data from this study identified a significant discrepancy between preservice counselors' perceptions of their career opportunities and actual placement data.     

Numerical vs Cardinal Measurements in Multiattribute Decision Making: How Exact Is Enough?

Multiattribute decision making can involve consideration of both quantitative and qualitative measures of criteria attaintment. Some decision support systems (decision aids) to help multiattribute decision making quantify value functions. One of the most popular of these systems, multiattribute utility theory (MAUT), requires two types of input. Decision makers need to express the relative value of different attainment levels on each criterion, as well as express the relative importance of these criteria. Some systems (such as DECAID) require simple direct graphical input of value and criterion importance. Other systems (such as LOGICAL DECISION) use more complex means of expressing relative value. Either way, MAUT converts expressions of criterion importance into quantitative form. This study compares the relative stability of numerical results obtained through two decision support systems, DECAID and LOGICAL DECISION (LD), used in the task of evaluation of multiattribute alternatives. Additionally the relative stability of results was measured by comparison with results obtained using an ordinal method, ZAPROS. ZAPROS is a decision support system for construction of a partial order over the set of alternatives. It does not require conversion of qualitative measures into quantitative form. The relations among alternatives are close to those based on ordinal dominance. The results of experiments show that ordinal relationships between task parameters are much more stable than those obtained from quantitative measures. Results from DECAID and LD are much less coincident with each other than with results obtained through ZAPROS. Many inconsistencies were found in subject responses. It is concluded that more attention should be given to the means of testing judgment consistency, and that in some cases, attempts to solve decision tasks through more "exact" judgments of value function parameters may lead to erroneous results.     

Understanding Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder: Focus on Decision Making

Current approaches to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) have suggested that neurobiological abnormalities play a crucial role in the etiology and course of this psychiatric illness. In particular, a fronto-subcortical circuit, including the orbitofrontal cortex, basal ganglia and thalamus appears to be involved in the expression of OCD symptoms. Neuropsychological studies have also shown that patients with OCD show deficits in cognitive abilities that are strictly linked to the functioning of the frontal lobe and its related fronto-subcortical structures, such as executive functioning deficits and insufficient cognitive-behavioral flexibility. This article focuses on decision making, an executive ability that plays a crucial role in many real-life situations, whereby individuals choose between pursuing strategies of action that involve only immediate reward and others based on long-term reward. Although the role of decision-making deficits in the evolution of OCD requires further research, the collected findings have significant implications for understanding the clinical and behavioral heterogeneity that characterizes individuals with OCD.     

Noncompetition Agreements: How Informed Are Counselors?

A noncompetition agreement is a contract between employer and employee prohibiting the practice of a trade or profession for a specified time or within a specified region upon an employee's leaving an employer's hire (A. Valiulis, 1985). The authors assessed American Mental Health Counselor Association members' knowledge of the legal bases for these contracts and their agreement with the legal opinions and also assessed the degree of similarity and dissimilarity between members' knowledge of and agreement with the legal opinions. Results showed that counselors are better prepared to look after the welfare of their clients than their own employment interests. Implications for counselor training are discussed.     

Out of the Clash of Hermeneutic Rules Comes Ethical Decision Making: But Does it?

IRBs and REBs use specialized language. A process of definition and re-definition of the situation occurs. That process of interpretation can usefully be considered from the perspective of interpretive social science models involving Symbolic Interaction, Semiotics and Hermeneutics. Seven examples are provided to flesh out the nuances of contextual decision making and the “casuistic” aspects of a balanced approach to complex problems. While many decisions are relatively unproblematic and can follow a template, it is not possible simply to apply a fixed and mechanical approach. Hence, a socialization process occurs in which committee members must learn the actual application of the rules as opposed to the formal requirements. A “tightrope” between overly rigid and overly lax interpretations must be crossed and the more we understand the process of semiosis and the semiotic context the more likely it will be that truly ethical decisions will be “accomplished.” The lack of adequate survey data makes it all the more important to have good theoretical understanding of process.     

Letters of Recommendation for the Predoctoral Internship in Medical Schools and Other Settings: Do They Enhance Decision Making in the Selection Process?

Since the 1970s, letters of recommendation to medical and other internship settings have surfaced as important variables in the internship selection process. However, several studies have challenged their value in the selection process, specifically by pointing out that these letters have an overly positive bias and fail to address applicant weaknesses. Our study, using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count text analysis method, developed a quantitative profile for a sample of letters of recommendation, determined whether letters differentiated among applicants with regard to positive/negative attributions, evaluated letters for positive and negative bias, and investigated potential gender bias of writers toward applicants. Results indicated that writers apply positive and negative attributions homogeneously across applicants, thus, rendering applicant differentiation on this basis impossible. Also, results demonstrated that letters of male and female writers were not biased toward male or female applicants. These findings, in combination with previous studies, question the utility of letters of recommendation as presently structured. Possible modifications are discussed.     

Whose Values? Whose Risk? Exploring Decision Making About Trial of Labor After Cesarean

In this article, we discuss decision making during labor and delivery, specifically focusing on decision making around offering women a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC). Many have discussed how humans are notoriously bad at assessing risks and how we often distort the nature of various risks surrounding childbirth. We will build on this discussion by showing that physicians make decisions around TOLAC not only based on distortions of risk, but also based on personal values (i.e. what level of risk are you comfortable with or what types of risks are you willing to take) rather than medical data (or at least medical data alone). As a result of this, we will further suggest that the party who is best epistemically situated to make decisions about TOLAC is the woman herself.     

Predicting Behavior From Actions in the Past: Repeated Decision Making or a Matter of Habit?

This paper summarizes research on determinants of repeated behaviors, and the decision processes underlying them. The present research focuses on travel mode choices as an example of such behaviors. It is proposed that when behavior is performed repeatedly and becomes habitual, it is guided by automated cognitive processes, rather than being preceded by elaborate decision processes (i.e., a decision based on attitudes and intentions). First, current attitude-behavior models are discussed, and the role of habit in these models is examined. Second, research is presented on the decision processes preceding travel mode choices. Based on the present theoretical and empirical overview, it is concluded that frequently performed behavior is often a matter of habit, thereby establishing a boundary condition for the applicability of attitude-behavior models. However, more systematic research is required to disentangle the role of habit in attitude-behavior models and to learn more about the cognitive processes underlying habitual behavior.     

Referees' Decision Making in Handball and Transgressive Behaviors: Influence of Stereotypes About Gender of Players?

We offer norm theory as a framework for developing some common ground within both feminist psychology and lesbian and gay psychology about the meaning of empirical differences between social groups. Norm theory is a social cognitive theory that predicts that empirical differences will be consistently explained by taking more typical groups (e.g., men, straight people) as implicit norms for comparison and by attributing differences to less typical groups (e.g., women, lesbians, and gay men). Results of an experiment (N = 114) are presented to show that norms shape interpretations of empirical differences between lesbian/gay and straight persons by (1) leading explanations to focus on attributes of lesbian/gay persons, and (2) leading to judgments that straight persons have less mutable attributes. Stereotypes also affected interpretations; stereotype-consistent results led to more essentialistic explanations and, when targets were female, to higher ratings of the results' importance and fundamentality. We highlight how experiments can be used to understand the process of constructing the meaning of scientific data, and make recommendations for empiricists' interpretive practices and constructionist theories in feminist psychology and lesbian and gay psychology.