Escalation in organizational decision making a case of recruiting an incompetent employee

This paper analyses a case of hiring a manager who subsequently proves to be incompetent. Analysis reveals the importance of structural factors in escalation, especially politics. When these are considered, persistence emerges as both escalatory and rational. Likewise, behaviours manifest of information bias are actually logical managerial strategies and may mask political calculation. New potential escalation variables are identified including power, visibility, and organization culture. Withdrawal reflects an intricate balancing of factors including risk and opportunity. The theoretical implications of the findings are discussed.     

Group decision process and incrementalism in organizational decision making

In two studies examining resource allocation, support is found for the notion that group decisions are affected in systematic ways depending on whether or not there was individual consideration of the problem before meeting as a group. Specifically, compared to no prior consideration groups, prior consideration groups (1) escalate their commitment more in progress (i.e., ongoing) decisions, and (2) are less willing to concentrate resources on a single project in adoption (i.e., resource utilization) decisions. The findings challenge the blanket assertion that promoting divergent views in a group decision context is always related to better decisions.     

航空决策模型及其影响因素分析

航空决策指在航空飞行驾驶过程中,飞行员面对特定情境做出最佳决策时的心理过程。情景评估和风险评估是航空决策模型中最重要的两个阶段。个体认知因素、疲劳和动机因素以及知识经验的限制会导致不良航空决策,组织压力和社会因素则通过混淆飞行员对飞行安全的看法间接影响航空决策。在未来的研究中,研究者应当重视构建更合理的航空决策模型,从辩证的角度全面看待知识经验与飞行安全的关系,加强对动机因素和环境因素的调查分析和实验性研究。     

Processes of patient decision making: Theoretical and methodological issues

Abstract

There is a paucity of research studying patients' decision making processes. Traditional normative approaches investigating human decision have presented rational, analytic processing as a ‘gold standard’ for decision making with decision aids developed to facilitate such thinking. This paradigm has been challenged by the recent emergence of naturalistic decision making. Naturalistic approaches argue for techniques modelled closer to how decisions are actually made in ‘real life’. Early work in this evolving field suggests the importance of more automatic, intuitive processing such as the use of heuristic short-cuts. This paper discusses the contribution of naturalistic decision theory and assesses its usefulness as an alternative to classical decision approaches in investigating patient decision making. Approaches for measuring underlying cognitive processes are also critically discussed.     

An outcomes model of medical decision making

In the traditional fix-it model of medical decision making, the identified problem is typically characterized by a diagnosis that indicates a deviation from normalcy. When a medical problem is multifaceted and the available interventions are only partially effective, a broader vision of the health care endeavor is needed. What matters to the patient, and what should matter to the practitioner, is the patient's future possibilities. More specifically, what is important is the character of the alternative futures that the patient could have and choosing among them so as to achieve the best future possible, with the ranking of outcomes determined by the patient's preferences. This paper describes the fix-it model, presents and defends the outcomes-based model, and demonstrates that the latter is useful in developing normative conceptions of informed consent and decision making and in establishing a basis for societal involvement in the decision making process. Finally, several shortcomings of the model will be acknowledged.     

Effectiveness of the GOFER course in decision making for high school students

The paper describes and evaluates the GOFER course in decision making for high school students (Mann, Harmoni and Power, 1988). The course was based on principles from the conflict theory of decision making (Janis and Mann, 1977) and was designed to provide adolescents with an understanding of factors that produce good and poor decision making as well as knowledge and practice of sound decision skills. Two evaluation studies were conducted to examine effectiveness of the course. Study 1 was conducted with young adolescents (12 year olds). It found a significant difference between students trained in the course and a control group on measures of self-esteem as a decision maker, self reported decision habits and knowledge of decision strategy. Study 2 was conducted with mid-adolescents (15 year olds). It, too, found a significant difference between students who took the course and a control group on measures of self esteem as a decision maker and self-reported decision habits. It is concluded that while the evaluation study fell short of an ideal test, the GOFER course met the criteria of improving student knowledge, raising confidence in decision making and changing self reported decision habits.     

Information distortion in self-other decision making

In both organizational and social arenas, individuals make decisions for themselves and for other individuals. But research in decision making has provided little input into whether or how these decisions are psychologically different. In this paper, I propose that decisions—depending on whom they are for—vary according to the extent of information distortion, such that, individuals who choose for themselves demonstrate more postdecisional distortion, yet less predecisional distortion than individuals who choose on behalf of others. To test this hypothesis, participants in an experiment made a decision between two restaurants. Attributes about each restaurant were presented sequentially, and preferences were measured following each attribute. As expected, participants who chose for themselves experienced more postdecisional distortion. However, among participants who chose on behalf of others, greater distortion of predecisional attribute information was observed. These findings shed light on the differences in self-other decision making, as well as on research concerning information distortion.     

Beyond IQ: A latent state-trait analysis of general intelligence, dynamic decision making, and implicit learning

The present study investigated cognitive performance measures beyond IQ. In particular, we investigated the psychometric properties of dynamic decision making variables and implicit learning variables and their relation with general intelligence and professional success. N = 173 employees from different companies and occupational groups completed two standard intelligence tests, two dynamic decision making tasks, and two implicit learning tasks at two measurement occasions each. We used structural equation models to test latent state-trait measurement models and the relation between constructs. The results suggest that dynamic decision making and implicit learning are substantially related with general intelligence. Furthermore, general intelligence is the best predictor for income, social status, and educational attainment. Dynamic decision making can predict supervisor ratings even beyond general intelligence.     

Ego depletion and its paradoxical effects on ethical decision making

Whereas previous research has shown that ego depletion can lead to an increase in unethical behavior, we suggest that this effect hinges on the social consensus of the unethical behavior. Drawing from theories on social consensus and dual-process decision-making, we hypothesize and confirm that ego depletion is associated with increased unethical behavior of comparatively low social consensus. We then find that, as hypothesized, ego depletion is associated with decreased unethical behavior of high social consensus (Studies 1 and 2). Results further suggest that, controlling for state self-control resources, depleted participants are less likely to engage in unethical behavior of high social consensus as a result of increased subjective fatigue (Study 3). Taken together, our findings challenge a widely-held assumption about the negative effects of ego depletion on ethical decision making.     

Mindfulness-based stress reduction effects on moral reasoning and decision making

Previous research has demonstrated that mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) improves psychological functioning in multiple domains. However, to date, no studies have examined the effects of MBSR on moral reasoning and decision making. This single group design study examined the effect of MBSR on moral reasoning and ethical decision making, mindfulness, emotion, and well-being. Additionally, we investigated whether there was an association between the amount of meditation practice during MBSR and changes in moral reasoning and ethical decision making, emotions, mindfulness, and well-being. Results indicated that MBSR was associated with improvements in mindful attention, emotion and well-being. Further, amount of meditation practice was associated with greater improvement in mindful attention. Two-month follow-up results showed that, MBSR resulted in improvements in moral reasoning and ethical decision making, mindful attention, emotion, and well-being. This study provides preliminary evidence that MBSR may potentially facilitate moral reasoning and decision making in adults.     

A dual-process approach to health risk decision making: The prototype willingness model

Although dual-process models in cognitive, personality, and social psychology have stimulated a large body of research about analytic and heuristic modes of decision making, these models have seldom been applied to the study of adolescent risk behaviors. In addition, the developmental course of these two kinds of information processing, and their relation to the development of self-regulation are not well understood at this time. The current paper reviews what leading dual-process models have to say about the development of analytic and heuristic decision making, and their implications for adolescent risk behavior. In addition, it reviews research on the prototype willingness model of adolescent decision making—a dual-process model designed specifically to address non-intentional, but volitional adolescent risk behavior. It also discusses the implications of dual-process models for intervention research.     

The interactive effects of organizational politics and exchange ideology on manager ratings of retention

This study examined the moderating effect of exchange ideology on the relation between perceptions of organizational politics and manager-rated retention. Data collected from 178 employees of a distribution services organization indicated that employees’ perceptions of organizational politics related negatively related to manager assessments of retention. However, the variables were only related among employees with a moderate to strong exchange ideology. These individuals were more sensitive to a political environment than individuals with a weak exchange ideology. Implications for employees seeking to actively manage their careers are discussed.     

Effects of valence and framing in decision making II: Estimating subjective weighting1

Abstract: In comparison between choice options, judgments of “How much better is a preferred option?” and “How much worse is a less preferred option?” may differ in their magnitudes. Such discrepancies are called “valence effects.” Previously, Yamagishi and Miyamoto (1996) observed systematic positive valence effects (“Better” exceeding “Worse”) in the domain of gains and systematic negative valence effects (“Worse” exceeding “Better”) in the domain of losses. The current experiment used the directions of valence effects as a tool to assess the decision maker's interpretation of choice tasks under the “framing effect” ( Tversky & Kahneman, 1986 ). Preferences under the framing effect switch from certain options in the domain of gains to uncertain options in the domain of losses. This study examined whether preferences for certain options were associated with positive valence effects, whereas preferences for uncertain options were associated with negative valence effects. Moreover, conditions under which preference reversals under the framing manipulations ceased to occur were examined. The effects of valence showed that framing effects ceased to occur when decision makers maintained consistent task interpretations as pertaining to gains or to losses. Most importantly, the pattern of subjective weighting under the valence effects was consistent with previous explanation of valence effects ( Yamagishi & Miyamoto, 1996 ). Possibilities for extending the current findings to understanding related psychological phenomena are discussed.     

The effect of introspection on judgment and decision making is dependent on the quality of conscious thinking

That introspection may impair certain judgments and result in fabrication has been attributed to a distracting shift from more adaptive intuitive processing to more analytic and conscious processing. This phenomenon was studied in an experiment where participants made multidimensional visual choices. It was found that the effect of this shift on decision-making performance was dependent on the quality of the explanations during introspection, while the performance in silent conditions was not. Therefore, it appears that the effect of introspection on judgments is not only influenced by the thinking mode per se, but also by the individual’s ability to approach the decision problem analytically.     

A study of the foundations of ethical decision making of clinical medical ethicists

A study of clinical medical ethicists was conducted to determine the various philosophical positions they hold with respect to ethical decision making in medicine and their various positions' relationship to the subjective-objective controversy in value theory. The study consisted of analyzing and interpreting data gathered from questionnaires from 52 clinical medical ethicists at 28 major health care centers in the United States. The study revealed that most clinical medical ethicists tend to be objectivists in value theory, i.e., believe that value judgments are knowledge claims capable of being true or false and therefore expressions of moral requirements and normative imperatives emanating from an external value structure or moral order in the world. In addition, the study revealed that most clinical medical ethicists are consistent in the philosophical foundations of their ethical decision making, i.e., in decision making regarding values they tend not to hold beliefs which are incompatible with other beliefs they hold about values.     

Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations

Decision making groups often exchange and integrate distributed information to a lesser extent than is desirable for high-quality decisions. We propose that group members’ shared task representations play an important role in this respect, because groups are often insufficiently attuned to the task’s information elaboration requirements. Task representations emphasizing elaboration of decision-relevant information should therefore enhance decision-making performance. This should hold especially when group members realize that they share these task representations, because this realization removes psychological barriers to introducing new insights. Testing these hypotheses, we compared information elaboration and decision-making performance of control groups and groups receiving instructions emphasizing information elaboration in two experiments. Half of the experimental groups were also made to realize that they shared the elaboration instructions. As predicted, groups with task representations emphasizing information elaboration and the realization they shared these representations outperformed groups in the other conditions. This effect was mediated by information elaboration.     

Perceptions of the organizational context and psychological contract breach: Assessing competing perspectives

This study examines how employees’ perceptions of specific features of the organizational context—organizational politics and procedural justice—are related to their evaluations of psychological contract breach and subsequent attitudes and behaviors. Across three studies, we examined the appropriateness of four models for describing relationships among the focal constructs. Results of these studies support (a) an environmental responsiveness model in which psychological contract breach mediates the effects of politics and justice on employee outcomes, and (b) a general fairness evaluation model where politics, justice, and psychological contract breach serve as indicators of a higher order factor that predicts employee attitudes and behavior. Implications and directions for future research are presented.     

Vocational choice: A decision making perspective

We propose a model of vocational choice that can be used for analyzing and guiding the decision processes underlying career and job choices. Our model is based on research in behavioral decision making (BDM), in particular the choice goals framework developed by Bettman, Luce, and Payne (1998). The basic model involves two major processes. First, the selection of a decision strategy according to four choice goals: maximizing decision accuracy, minimizing cognitive effort, minimizing negative emotion, and maximizing justifiability of the decision. Second, the construction of situation-specific preferences, which can reflect irrelevant task and context factors such as the evaluation mode. This basic model is extended to account for social influences and the long decision time typical of most career and job decisions. We review research on vocational choice in light of this model, discuss normative implications for counseling, and outline a research agenda for studying vocational choice from a behavioral decision making perspective.     

A neural cognitive model of argumentation with application to legal inference and decision making

Formal models of argumentation have been investigated in several areas, from multi-agent systems and artificial intelligence (AI) to decision making, philosophy and law. In artificial intelligence, logic-based models have been the standard for the representation of argumentative reasoning. More recently, the standard logic-based models have been shown equivalent to standard connectionist models. This has created a new line of research where (i) neural networks can be used as a parallel computational model for argumentation and (ii) neural networks can be used to combine argumentation, quantitative reasoning and statistical learning. At the same time, non-standard logic models of argumentation started to emerge. In this paper, we propose a connectionist cognitive model of argumentation that accounts for both standard and non-standard forms of argumentation. The model is shown to be an adequate framework for dealing with standard and non-standard argumentation, including joint-attacks, argument support, ordered attacks, disjunctive attacks, meta-level attacks, self-defeating attacks, argument accrual and uncertainty. We show that the neural cognitive approach offers an adequate way of modelling all of these different aspects of argumentation. We have applied the framework to the modelling of a public prosecution charging decision as part of a real legal decision making case study containing many of the above aspects of argumentation. The results show that the model can be a useful tool in the analysis of legal decision making, including the analysis of what-if questions and the analysis of alternative conclusions. The approach opens up two new perspectives in the short-term: the use of neural networks for computing prevailing arguments efficiently through the propagation in parallel of neuronal activations, and the use of the same networks to evolve the structure of the argumentation network through learning (e.g. to learn the strength of arguments from data).