Summary and analysis of an article on decision making
Summary
Maria Lewicka indicates that people should choose the alternative with the highest sum of the products of estimated utilities and probabilities. A decision problem involves probabilities and utilities which are two important and independent variables in the decision making process. Additionally, people ascribe utilities and assess decisions using models of social cognitive (Rob & Ola, 91). How the evaluation of the decision is made is dependent on inherent factors surrounding the decision process. Such factors include how the decision is framed, its expected effects and the prevailing descriptive judgment.
In the decision making process, managers or leaders should apply a clear, logical thought process. They should clearly identify and define the problem, gather information pertaining to the issue, consider the possible solutions and select the unsurpassed course of action. Afterwards, plan how the decision will be implemented so as to enable them monitor the results (Rob & Ola, 94). The normative models of economic theory provide a clear vision, and better understanding of the decision making process would reduce the cost and maximize gains. People must overcome their biases and behave optimally.
Additionally, Maria illustrates that cognitive and emotional utilities influence the decision making process. Osgood conducted research in which he established that people use effective and descriptive terms to describe the social world (Osgood, 76). Many of the concepts are heavily loaded with good-bad evaluation criteria which affect more than 50% of judgments (Rob & Ola, 98). In Zajonc’s paper where preferences are set against inferences, the dimension of effective versus cognitive processing is taken into account. The two were found to have an irrevocable and instantaneous relationship that is challenging to change with lucid argumentation.
Research in social cognizance recognizes a dual cognitive and emotional, basis and nature of human judgments. This distinction is very important for attitude change, impression formation and comprehending how individuals form and evaluate judgments in conditions that require them to decide on the best course of action. The journal defines utility of a decision as its usefulness not essentially in terms of material but also immaterial benefits. The better decision is, therefore, that which provides a higher utility. Managers must strive to make sound decisions that will have an undesirable effect on the development of their business (Osgood, 102). The decisions must support the organization’s goals and objectives. Utilities are descriptive in nature. This has continuously been accentuated in decision theory. The degree of satisfaction, pleasure-displeasure, derived from the decision can effectively be displayed through the various stimuli.
Shifts in preferences commonly occur in the decision making process. An alternative might appear to be very promising when looked from the surface but prove to be costly upon subjection to scrutiny. Additionally, due to competition among the alternatives some alternatives are bolstered, and others dampen with time. Application of these cognitive manipulations makes a standard coherent choice shaky. It is time to move the decision making process to new improved strategies (Rob & Ola, 101). Managers must improve their judgment and move it to the next level knowing very well that decisions are influenced by cognition. Failures to make prime choices are extremely costly. Managers must extensively apply the concept of positive-negative asymmetry (PNA) when making decisions and avert any adversities that might arise from poor decision making. They should know that people are likely to agree on what is undesirable, and the desirable choices will always face objection.
Formulation of hypothesis
Null Hypothesis
Decision making process is unaffected by the ascribed utilities, that is, cognitive utilities and emotional utilities. The hypothesis disapproves the fact that both emotional and cognitive utilities are significant in every decision process.
Alternative hypothesis
The article attempts to find out whether the two utilities have influence on human decision process.
In this article the outcome variable is the decision making while the predictors are the emotional and cognitive utilities.
Type of the study
The study applies the Experimental method of study was the cognitive abilities of individuals are evaluated and then compared with other individuals. For instance, a large number of studies, including in experimental and natural settings are conducted to determine the impact of the utilities on the decision process (McNeill, p.56). Under the strengths of this method, it increases control and accurate measurement and enhances standardized procedures where replication is likely. However, the method does not allow the control of all variables and may raise the ethical problems of deception.
In this study, the predictor variables (emotional and cognitive utilities) were measured before the outcome variable (decision making). This is because the study aimed at testing whether the predictor variables have an effect on the outcome variable.
The findings of this study can be indiscriminative in other situations. For example, the positive utilities are highly associated to the emotional individual than negative utilities, which are in most cases cognitive.
The study provides significant information to a businessman suggesting that a person has considerable flexibility in utilizing utilities in the decision targets. Therefore, a businessman has to consider cognitive and emotional utilities when making decisions.
The study does not rule out alternative explanation for the findings because it was meant to be an alternative-wise search. The study involves cognitive or emotional recommitment to the alternative.
The study has used the factor analysis technique of research analytical techniques, where psychological factors are used to explain the phenomena.
The findings suggested that cognitive and emotional utilities are applicable in determining the level of decision making. Therefore, for a rational decision maker, in any organization, they have to be endowed with the two utilities. As a result, the findings reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis.
Conclusion
A strong relationship between emotional and cognitive has been described in the findings. Prior studies have noted the importance of appreciating the types of utilities while making decision. The article has given an account of and the reasons for the widespread use of utilities in decision making. Utility, according to Maria, means useful of profitability. The definition suggests that utility is the evaluation of the target object and determining the rate of how good or bad the thing is that become useful when we human realize that (Butterfield & Jeff, 34).
Through the study, I learned that utilities prevent inconsistencies in choice behavior. Therefore, the best performance becomes good decision making with the respect to my superordinate goal. By putting the decision theory into action, I have discovered that there are four stages that the pre-decisional information search passes. According to Maria, she suggested that positive utilities are attached with more emotional characters, while negative utilities is associated with characters who are more often cognitive. Therefore, all my decisions are affected by my emotions end cognition.
Consequently, I should always choose the best utility in order to make the best decision. Altogether, my decisions as well as my classmates may be endowed with significant flexibility in attributing utilities to make decision targets (Butterfield & Jeff, 67). The findings reveal that, my ability to realistically assess negative decision targets, that is attribution of cognitive utilities combined with an affinity to make positive targets, that is emotional utilities, bring out our capability to make decisions that are both rational or capable of emotional commitment.
Works Cited
Osgood, William R, James F. Molloy, and William R. Osgood. Business Decision Making for Higher Profits: A 1-2-3 Business User's Guide. Somerville, Mass: Curtin & London, 1984. Print.
Rob Ranyard and Ola Stenson. making decisions. Cognitive models and explanations. London and New York. Rutledge, 1997. Print. http://psych.uw.edu.pl/zalacznik/ml/publikacje/Hate_wiser_than_love.pdf
Butterfield, Jeff. Problem Solving and Decision Making. Mason, Ohio: South-Western, 2013. Print.
McNeill, Patrick. Research Methods. London: Routledge, 1990. Print.
Morrison, James D. Analytical Methods. New York: Academic Press, 1983. Print.
