Decision psychology is the internal structure of the process of identifying and selecting alternatives based on the values, preferences and beliefs of the person making the choice.
This process is seen as a problem-solving activity, culminating in a choice that is considered optimal or at least satisfactory. This process can be based on explicit or implicit knowledge and beliefs.
Knowledge
Implicit knowledge can be gained through experience or reflection. It might be something you can't put into words.
Direct (explicit) knowledge is often used to fill gaps in complex decision-making processes. Typically, both of these types of knowledge, implicit and explicit, are used in conjunction with each other in the selection process. Explicit knowledge is less likely to lead to important decisions, but the process covered in this article quite often depends on knowledge gained from experience.
Summary
The main part of the decision-making process in psychology) includes the analysis of a finite set alternatives described in terms of evaluation criteria. The challenge then may be to rank these alternatives in terms of how attractive they are to the choice-makers. Another challenge might be to find the best alternative, or to determine the relative overall priority of each alternative (for example, if they are both incompatible projects dependent on limited funds) when all criteria are considered simultaneously.
The science of multicriteria decision analysis deals with the study of such problems. This field of knowledge has always attracted the interest of many researchers and practitioners and is still discussed at a high level, since there are many methods in it that can help people in the difficult process of choosing between two (or more) alternatives.
Meaning
Logical decision making is an important part of all scientific disciplines, where experts apply their knowledge in a certain area in order to do something. For example, medical decision making is often linked to diagnosis and the choice of appropriate treatment. But naturalistic research on the topic shows that in situations with more limited time, higher stakes, or an increased chance for error, experts can make intuitive choices while ignoring structured approaches. They can follow a default strategy that suits their experience and aligns with the general course of action, without weighing the alternatives.
Outside influence
The environment may in a certain wayinfluence the psychology of decision-making methods. For example, environmental complexity (when it is not clear which choice will be most effective) is a factor influencing cognitive function. A complex environment is an environment with a large number of different possible states that change (or disappear altogether) over time. Research conducted at the University of Colorado has shown that more challenging environments correlate with higher cognitive function. This means that location can influence the decision.
During one experiment, the complexity of choice was measured by the number of small objects and appliances in a room (environment). A plain room had fewer of those things. Cognitive function was greatly affected by the higher degree of complexity of the environment, which contributed to the development of the skill of analyzing the situation and formulating the best choice possible.
Analysis problem
It is important to distinguish between problem analysis and decision making. It is traditionally argued that the problem must first be analyzed so that the information gathered in this process can be used to make some kind of meaningful choice.
Analysis paralysis is a state of overanalysis (or overthinking) of a situation where a choice or action is never taken or is constantly delayed, effectively paralyzing both the person and the situation. In the psychology of emergency decision-making, this paralysis is considered the worst thing ever.
Rationality andirrationality
In economics, it is believed that if people are reasonable and free to make their own decisions, then they will behave according to rational choice theory. It states that a person consistently makes choices that lead to the best situation for himself, taking into account all available considerations, including costs and benefits. The rationality of these considerations is determined from the point of view of the person himself, so the choice is not irrational just because someone considers it doubtful. The psychology of choice and decision-making deals with similar problems.
In reality, however, there are some factors that influence people and cause them to make irrational choices, such as choosing conflicting options when faced with the same problem phrased in two different ways.
One of the most famous methods of decision-making psychology is the theory of subjective expected utility, which describes the rational behavior of a person making a choice.
Rational choice-making is often based on experience, and there are theories that can apply this approach on proven mathematical grounds so that subjectivity is kept to a minimum, such as scenario optimization theory.
Group decision making (psychology)
In groups, people act together through active and complex processes. They usually consist of three steps:
- initial preferences expressed by group members;
- membersgroups share information about these preferences;
- finally, the participants unite their views and come to a common decision on how to solve this problem.
Although these steps are relatively trivial, judgments are often skewed by cognitive and motivational biases.
The psychology of group decision making is the study of a situation in which people collectively make a choice from several alternatives. The choice in this case no longer refers to any particular person, because everyone is a member of the group. This is because all individuals and social group processes such as social influence contribute to the outcome. The choices made by a group are often different from the choices made by individuals. Group polarization is one clear example: groups tend to make choices that are more extreme than those made by individuals. Read more about the group decision making process in social psychology below.
Differences and their impact
There is a lot of debate about whether the difference between collective and individual thinking leads to better or worse results. According to the idea of synergy, decisions made by a group often turn out to be much more effective and correct than those made by one person. Nevertheless, there are also examples when the choice made by the team turned out to be a failure, erroneous. Therefore, many questions from the field of managerial psychology and managerial decision-making still remain open.
Factors affectingthe behavior of other populations also influence group actions. It has been observed that, for example, groups with a high degree of solidarity tend to make joint choices more quickly. Moreover, when individuals make choices as part of a group, there is a tendency to be biased towards discussing common knowledge.
Social identity
The study of social identity inspires us to take a more general approach to group decision-making than the popular model of groupthink, which is only a narrow view of such situations.
Process and result
Decision making in groups is sometimes divided into two separate elements - process and outcome. The process refers to group interactions. Some of these ideas include building coalitions among participants, and influence and persuasion among participants. The use of demagoguery and other political devices in such situations is often viewed negatively, but it is a chance to deal with situations where the participants are in conflict with each other, there are mutual dependencies that cannot be avoided, there are no neutral supervisory bodies, etc.
Systems and technologies
In addition to the different processes that affect the psychology of decision making, group choice support systems (GDSS) can also have different rules. The decision rule is very common and is the GDSS protocol that the group uses to select alternatives when planning scenarios. Theseprotocols are often stored on a computer in various advanced corporations.
Rules
Multiple leadership (lack of a single leader) and dictatorship, as polar extremes, are less desirable as the rules of this social process, since they do not require the participation of a larger group to determine the choice, and everything is tied solely to the will of one person (dictator, authoritarian leader, etc.), or, in the case of multiple governance, at the behest of an unthinking majority. In the second case, the lack of commitment on the part of individuals in the group can be problematic at the stage of implementing the choice made.
There are no perfect rules in this matter. Depending on how the rules are implemented in practice and in any particular situation, this can lead to moments when either no decision is made at all, or when the accepted options are incompatible with each other.
Pros and cons
There are strengths and weaknesses in each of the above social decision schemes. Delegation saves time and is a good method of unleashing conflicts and issues of medium importance, but ignored participants may react negatively to such a strategy. Averaging answers blurs some participants' extreme opinions, but the final choice may be disappointing for many.
Elections or voting is the most consistent pattern for top-level choice and requires the least amount of effort. However, voting may result inlosing team members feel alienated and reluctantly force themselves to accept the will of the majority. Consensus schemes involve group members more deeply and tend to result in high levels of solidarity. But it can be difficult for a group to reach such decisions.
Groups have many advantages and disadvantages when making decisions. Groups, by definition, are made up of two or more people, and for this reason naturally have access to more information and have a greater ability to process that information. However, they also have a number of obligations to make choices, such as requiring more time for reflection and, as a result, a tendency to act rashly or ineffectively.
Some problems are also so simple that the process of group decision-making leads to ridiculous situations when, figuratively speaking, there are too many cooks in the kitchen: when working on such trivial and mundane problems, excessive zeal of group members can lead to general failure. This is one of the main problems of group decision making in social psychology.
Role of computers
The idea of using computerized support systems was once proposed by James Mind to eliminate human error. However, he notes that the events following the Three Mile accident (the largest disaster in US commercial nuclear history) did not inspire confidence in the effectiveness of some forms of choice made by systems. For someindustrial accidents, independent safety display systems often failed.
Decision software is essential in the operation of autonomous robots and in various forms of active support for industrial operators, designers and managers.
Due to a number of considerations related to the difficulty of choice, computer decision support systems (DSS) have been developed to assist people in considering the consequences of different ways of thinking. They can help reduce the risk of human error. DSSs that attempt to implement some of the cognitive features of choice are called Intelligent Support Systems (IDSS). An active and intelligent program of this kind is an important tool for the development of complex engineering systems and the management of large technological and business projects.
Group Choice Advantage
Groups have great informational and motivational resources and therefore can outperform individuals. However, they do not always reach their maximum potential. Groups often lack proper communication skills between members. This means that group members lack the skills needed to clearly express their thoughts and desires.
Misunderstandings between team members can be the result of limitations in information processing and faulty perceptual habits of individual members. Where an individual (leader) controls the group, it can prevent others from contributing to the cause. This onefrom the axioms of the psychology of risk and decision making.
Maximizers and Satisfiers
Herbert A. Simon coined the phrase "bounded rationality" to express the idea that one person's psychology of making choices is limited by the information available, the time available, and the information processing capacity of one brain. Further psychological research has revealed individual differences between the two cognitive styles: Maximizers try to make the most optimal solution, while Satisfiers simply try to find an option that is “good enough.”
Maximizers tend to take longer to make decisions due to the desire to maximize the result in all respects. They are also the most likely to regret their choice (perhaps because they are more likely to admit that the decision turned out to be suboptimal than satisfyers).
Other discoveries
Psychologist Daniel Kahneman, who popularized the above terms originally coined by his colleagues Keith Stanovich and Richard West, has suggested that human choice results from the interaction of two kinds of cognitive processes: an automatic intuitive system (called "System 1") and a rational system (called "System 2"). System 1 is a spontaneous, fast, and irrational decision-making system, while System 2 is a rational, slow, and conscious decision-making system.
Decision-making styles and methodsin engineering psychology were developed by Aron Katsenelinboigen, the founder of the theory of predisposition. In his analysis of styles and methods, he mentioned the game of chess, saying that it reveals various strategies, in particular, the creation of methods that can be applied to other, more complex systems. The psychology of evaluation and decision-making in some way also resembles a game.
Conclusion
Difficulties of choice is a very important and relevant topic for modern society, which cannot be ignored. Thanks to this article, you understood what decision-making psychology is, how it works, and what the world's best experts think about it.
