Intuition: A Challenge for Psychological Research on Decision Making
ABSTRACT Intuition represents an enormous challenge for research on decision making. What is intuition? How does it modify our appreciation of cognitive abilities? When should people trust intuition? These questions set the agenda for this article, which (a) defines intuition, (b) comments on how intuition has been viewed across time in the decision making literature, (c) stresses the need to specify different types of intuition, (d) discusses when intuition is likely to lead to good decisions, and (e) presents four challenges. These are, first, elucidating the evolution of preferences; second, illuminating culturally acquired values such as morals; third, the need to educate intuitive responses; and fourth, problems in using intuition for decision making in a changing world. However, the major challenge facing intuition research is the need for conceptual work to define the nature and scope of different intuitive phenomena. To be useful, the concept should not become too broad.
- SourceAvailable from: Jo NelissenCurriculum and Teaching. 01/2013; Vol. 28(No. 2):27-44.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Using the critical incident technique, we investigated how 88 loan officers at four Swedish banks perceived their decision making in evaluations of commercial loan applications. First, we found that our sample of loan officers primarily used deliberation and less intuition when making decisions. Second, that the loan officers had greater difficulty in making decisions that involved soft information (e.g., client relationships) than decisions that involved hard information (e.g., financial information). Third, most decision making situations involved existing rather than new clients and low rather than high risk levels. Finally, we found a potential effect of organizational factors such as lending practices on lending decisions. Our findings have general implications for research on decision making processes. For the banking industry, this research identifies and elucidates the difficulties loan officers face in decision making of commercial loans.European Management Journal 04/2014; 32(2):362–372. · 0.80 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Diagnostic reasoning is considered to be based on the interaction between analytical and non-analytical cognitive processes. Gut feelings, a specific form of non-analytical reasoning, play a substantial role in diagnostic reasoning by general practitioners (GPs) and may activate analytical reasoning. In GP traineeships in the Netherlands, trainees mostly see patients alone but regularly consult with their supervisors to discuss patients and problems, receive feedback, and improve their competencies. In the present study, we examined the discussions of supervisors and their trainees about diagnostic reasoning in these so-called tutorial dialogues and how gut feelings feature in these discussions. 17 tutorial dialogues focussing on diagnostic reasoning were video-recorded and transcribed and the protocols were analysed using a detailed bottom-up and iterative content analysis and coding procedure. The dialogues were segmented into quotes. Each quote received a content code and a participant code. The number of words per code was used as a unit of analysis to quantitatively compare the contributions to the dialogues made by supervisors and trainees, and the attention given to different topics. The dialogues were usually analytical reflections on a trainee's diagnostic reasoning. A hypothetico-deductive strategy was often used, by listing differential diagnoses and discussing what information guided the reasoning process and might confirm or exclude provisional hypotheses. Gut feelings were discussed in seven dialogues. They were used as a tool in diagnostic reasoning, inducing analytical reflection, sometimes on the entire diagnostic reasoning process. The emphasis in these tutorial dialogues was on analytical components of diagnostic reasoning. Discussing gut feelings in tutorial dialogues seems to be a good educational method to familiarize trainees with non-analytical reasoning. Supervisors need specialised knowledge about these aspects of diagnostic reasoning and how to deal with them in medical education.Advances in Health Sciences Education 09/2014; · 2.06 Impact Factor