Introduction: Where to Decision Making? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Broadening behavioral decision research: Multiple levels of cognitive processing
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1999
The area of behavioral decision research, specifically the work on heuristics and biases, has had a tremendous influence on basic research, applied research, and application over the last twenty-five years. Its unique juxtaposition against economics has provided important benefits, but at the cost of leaving it disconnected from too much of psychology. This paper explores an expanded definition of behavioral decision research through the consideration of multiple levels of cognitive processing. Rather than being limited to how decision-makers depart from optimality, we offer a broader analysis of how decision-makers define the decision problem and link decisions to goals, as well as a more detailed focus on processes associated with implementing decisions.
psychol.ucl.ac.uk
This chapter reviews normative and descriptive aspects of decision making. Expected Utility Theory (EUT), the dominant normative theory of decision making, is often thought to provide a relatively poor description of how people actually make decisions.
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2004
During the course of their lives, people are faced with many decisions-covering a wide variety of contexts and ranging in importance. Common decision-making topics include career moves, whether to get married (and, if so, to whom and when), what house to rent (or buy), where to shop for groceries and what to have for dinner. The need for making a good decision grows as the importance of the context increases. Unfortunately, it is often not obvious what constitutes a good decision. At the bottom line, the question of decision quality is the essence of decision sciences: a main goal of researchers in the discipline is to help improve people's decision making. Yet, with few exceptions (e.g.,
Antecedents of Effective Decision Making: A Cognitive Approach1
Jos Lemmink is a professor and chairman of the department of marketing at Maastricht University. He holds a degree in Business Administration from the University of Groningen and a PhD from the University of Limburg. He was a market researcher for the Dutch Postal Services and Telecommunications for four years and a visiting professor at the University of Southern Queensland (Australia). He published extensively on quality management and modeling. His research interests concern service management and marketing, analyses of service processes, and marketing and the new media. He can be reached at
Decoupling Judgment and Decision Making: A Tale of Two Tails
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 2023
Is it true that if citizens understand hurricane probabilities, they will make more rational decisions for evacuation? Finding answers to such questions is not straightforward in the literature because the terms "judgment" and "decision making" are often used interchangeably. This terminology conflation leads to a lack of clarity on whether people make suboptimal decisions because of inaccurate judgments of information conveyed in visualizations or because they use alternative yet currently unknown heuristics. To decouple judgment from decision making, we review relevant concepts from the literature and present two preregistered experiments (N=601) to investigate if the task (judgment vs. decision making), the scenario (sports vs. humanitarian), and the visualization (quantile dotplots, density plots, probability bars) affect accuracy. While experiment 1 was inconclusive, we found evidence for a difference in experiment 2. Contrary to our expectations and previous research, which found decisions less accurate than their direct-equivalent judgments, our results pointed in the opposite direction. Our findings further revealed that decisions were less vulnerable to status-quo bias, suggesting decision makers may disfavor responses associated with inaction. We also found that both scenario and visualization types can influence people's judgments and decisions. Although effect sizes are not large and results should be interpreted carefully, we conclude that judgments cannot be safely used as proxy tasks for decision making, and discuss implications for visualization research and beyond. Materials and preregistrations are available at https://osf.io/ufzp5/?view only=adc0f78a23804c31bf7fdd9385cb264f.
Antecedents of Effective Decision Making: A Cognitive Approach
2003
Jos Lemmink is a professor and chairman of the department of marketing at Maastricht University. He holds a degree in Business Administration from the University of Groningen and a PhD from the University of Limburg. He was a market researcher for the Dutch Postal Services and Telecommunications for four years and a visiting professor at the University of Southern Queensland (Australia). He published extensively on quality management and modeling. His research interests concern service management and marketing, analyses of service processes, and marketing and the new media. He can be reached at
Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions
Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990
In recent years, the field of decision making has benefitted greatly from a renewed interest in how people face choices involving uncertain outcomes. Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions is a collection of outstanding articles that addresses the general topic of decision making from three different perspectives: (1) how people make decisions, (2) how "rational" people should make decisions, and (3) how less rational people, who aspire to rationality, might do better. The book brings together these different approaches to decision making, summarizes ongoing work in the field, and synthesizes research in the different areas.