Decision-making
In psychology, decision-making (also spelled decision making and decisionmaking) is regarded as the cognitive process resulting in the selection of a belief or a course of action among several possible alternative options.
Human performance has been the subject of active research from several perspectives: A major part of decision-making involves the analysis of a finite set of alternatives described in terms of evaluative criteria.
This area of decision-making, although long established, has attracted the interest of many researchers and practitioners and is still highly debated as there are many MCDA methods which may yield very different results when they are applied to exactly the same data.
Logical decision-making is an important part of all science-based professions, where specialists apply their knowledge in a given area to make informed decisions.
[8] Studies done at the University of Colorado have shown that more complex environments correlate with higher cognitive function, which means that a decision can be influenced by the location.
Traditionally, it is argued that problem solving is a step towards decision making, so that the information gathered in that process may be used towards decision-making.
Analysis paralysis is the state that a person enters where they are unable to make a decision, in effect paralyzing the outcome.
[13][14] Some of the main causes for analysis paralysis is the overwhelming flood of incoming data or the tendency to overanalyze the situation at hand.
Extinction by instinct is the state that a person is in when they make careless decisions without detailed planning or thorough systematic processes.
[17] Extinction by instinct can possibly be fixed by implementing a structural system, like checks and balances into a group or one's life.
People who make decisions in an extended period of time begin to lose mental energy needed to analyze all possible solutions.
A neuroimaging study[30] found distinctive patterns of neural activation in these regions depending on whether decisions were made on the basis of perceived personal volition or following directions from someone else.
[31][page needed] A common laboratory paradigm for studying neural decision-making is the two-alternative forced choice task (2AFC), in which a subject has to choose between two alternatives within a certain time.
[37] This theory holds that such decisions are aided by emotions, in the form of bodily states, that are elicited during the deliberation of future consequences and that mark different options for behavior as being advantageous or disadvantageous.
Functional conflicts are the better ones to gain higher quality decision making caused by the increased team knowledge and shared understanding.
One such behavior is adaptive decision-making, which is described as funneling and then analyzing the more promising information provided if the number of options to choose from increases.
[60] The reason children are not as fluid in their decision making is because they lack the ability to weigh the cost and effort needed to gather information in the decision-making process.
The main difference found is that more complex principles of fairness in decision making such as contextual and intentional information do not come until children get older.
Examples of their undeveloped capacities which influence decision-making would be impulse control, emotion regulation, delayed gratification and resistance to peer pressure.
[clarification needed] When adolescents are exposed to social and emotional stimuli, their socioemotional network is activated as well as areas of the brain involved in reward processing.
Teens can become addicted to risky behavior because they are in a high state of arousal and are rewarded for it not only by their own internal functions but also by their peers around them.
[68] Here is a list of commonly debated biases in judgment and decision-making: In groups, people generate decisions through active and complex processes.
Further psychological research has identified individual differences between two cognitive styles: maximizers try to make an optimal decision, whereas satisficers simply try to find a solution that is "good enough".
"[79]: 5 Katsenelinboigen states that apart from the methods (reactive and selective) and sub-methods randomization, predispositioning, programming), there are two major styles: positional and combinational.
The objective is implemented via a well-defined, and in some cases, unique sequence of moves aimed at reaching the set goal.
However, the combination is not the final goal of the positional player – it helps him to achieve the desirable, keeping in mind a predisposition for the future development.
[81][page needed] Myers developed a set of four bi-polar dimensions, called the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).
The terminal points on these dimensions are: thinking and feeling; extroversion and introversion; judgment and perception; and sensing and intuition.
For example, someone who scored near the thinking, extroversion, sensing, and judgment ends of the dimensions would tend to have a logical, analytical, objective, critical, and empirical decision-making style.
For example, Maris Martinsons has found that American, Japanese and Chinese business leaders each exhibit a distinctive national style of decision-making.
