No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
A psychological theory of indecisiveness
Abstract
Decision-making and choosing is not always easy. Thus, indecisiveness seems to be a widespread phenomenon. However, the scientific
literature on indecisiveness is rather limited. Indeed, even a clear definition of indecisiveness is lacking, let alone a
model in which various indecisiveness-related concepts are integrated. The present article aims at developing an indecisiveness
model. Within this model, indecisiveness refers to the experience of decision problems (i.e., lack of information, valuation
difficulty, and outcome uncertainty) resulting in overt choice-related behaviours such as delay, tunnel vision, and post-decision
dysfunctional behaviour (e.g., worry). Existing knowledge is discussed within the context of this model, and it is argued
that the model may serve as a guideline for future research on indecisiveness. (Netherlands Journal of Psychology, 63, 2-13.)
indecisiveness-decision-making-psychopathology
... Indecisiveness is an individual difference that describes the general tendency to experience difficulty during decision making. This tendency includes specific features such as finding decisions challenging, taking a long time to make decisions, attempting to delay or avoid making decisions, frequently changing one's mind before a final decision has been made, and ruminating and worrying about decisions once they have been made (Crites, 1969;Frost & Shows, 1993;Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Rassin, 2007;Salomone, 1982;Van Matre & Cooper, 1984).3 Indecisiveness tends to be positively related to maladaptive traits, lower wellbeing, and psychopathology, including neuroticism, impatience, perfectionism, worrying, dysfunctional impulsivity, stress, anxiety, depression, obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), lower quality of life, lower life satisfaction, and lower self-esteem (Barkley-Levenson & Fox, 2016;Bavolar, 2018;Di Fabio, Palazzeschi, Asulin-Peretz & Gati, 2013;Effert & Ferrari, 1989;Frost & Shows, 1993;Gayton, Clavin, Clavin & Broida, 1994;Germeijs & Verscheuren, 2011a;Rassin & Muris, 2005a, 2005bRassin, Muris, Franken, Smit & Wong, 2007;Taillefer, Liu, Ornstein & Vickers, 2016). ...
... We expected the MI-DD and IS to be positively correlated with the tendency to experience regret. Indeed, previous research and theory suggests that indecisive people are more likely to experience regret and that regret may also lead to future indecisiveness (Rassin, 2007;Spunt et al., 2009). ...
... Carleton, Norton & Asmundson, 2007). Previous research has found that indecisiveness correlates with intolerance of uncertainty , and Rassin's (2007) theory of indecisiveness includes intolerance of uncertainty as a potential cause of indecisiveness. Thus, we expected the MI-DD and IS to both be positively related to intolerance of uncertainty. ...
For two decades, researchers have investigated the correlates and consequences of individual differences in maximizing , the tendency to pursue the goal of making the best possible choice by extensively seeking out and comparing alternatives. In this time, many different conceptualizations of maximizing have been proposed, including several that incorporate a construct called “decision difficulty.” We propose that including decision difficulty in measures of maximizing is problematic because the tendency to experience difficulty when making decisions is a separate individual difference construct already studied independently of maximizing — namely, indecisiveness . Across two studies (total N = 639), we find that scales measuring decision difficulty and indecisiveness are strongly correlated ( r ’s ≥ .85), load on the same component in a principal component analysis, and show a very similar pattern of correlations with related variables. Moreover, decision difficulty and indecisiveness scales both show a divergent pattern of correlations when compared to measures of maximizing. We argue that decision difficulty scales are best interpreted as tapping the same underlying tendency as indecisiveness scales, and conclude that the tendency to experience difficulty in decision making is best conceptualized not as a component of maximizing, but rather a cause or consequence of it.
... Indecisiveness has been defined as the tendency to experience difficulty making decisions across multiple life domains (e.g., career, relationships, health; Di Fabio et al., 2013;Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Osipow, 1999;Rassin, 2007). The two most widely used questionnaires broadly assess indecisiveness through a wide range of features; importantly, the features assessed by these questionnaires are represented in the only theory that seeks to explain indecisiveness that we are aware of (Rassin, 2007). ...
... Indecisiveness has been defined as the tendency to experience difficulty making decisions across multiple life domains (e.g., career, relationships, health; Di Fabio et al., 2013;Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Osipow, 1999;Rassin, 2007). The two most widely used questionnaires broadly assess indecisiveness through a wide range of features; importantly, the features assessed by these questionnaires are represented in the only theory that seeks to explain indecisiveness that we are aware of (Rassin, 2007). These two questionnaires have the same name, the Indecisiveness Scale; we distinguish them by the following notations, the Indecisiveness Scale, Frost and Shows (IS-FS;Frost & Shows, 1993, later revised by Rassin et al., 2007) and Indecisiveness Scale, Germeijs and De Boeck (IS-GDB;Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002). ...
... We think that it is worth evaluating a three-factor structure that corresponds to cognitions (e.g., perceived difficulty), emotions (e.g., anxiety and regret), and behaviors (e.g., taking a long time to make decisions). This stems from the theory on indecisiveness, in which features of indecisiveness were conceptualized as falling under these three categories (Rassin, 2007); in fact, some researchers have focused on examining only one of these indecisiveness categories (e.g., emotions: Elaydi, 2006;behaviors: Potworowski, 2010). ...
Indecisiveness is a prevalent and impairing symptom among individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD). However, the use of different self-report questionnaires and factor analysis methods in past research has been a barrier to understanding the nature of indecisiveness in depression. Addressing these barriers could help to elucidate the dimensionality and validity of indecisiveness questionnaires, which in turn would clarify the relation of indecisiveness to depression. In our study of an online sample of adults (N = 602), we administered two commonly used indecisiveness questionnaires, a depressive symptom questionnaire, and a behavioral task assessing indecision. Through confirmatory factor analysis, we found that the combined indecisiveness questionnaires were best characterized by a two-factor model, with one factor corresponding to straightforwardly worded items and the other corresponding to reverse-scored items. Based on post hoc analyses involving tests of discriminant validity, we think that these two factors represent indecisiveness and decision-making confidence, respectively. Indecisiveness, but not decision-making confidence, was strongly associated with depressive symptoms. Indecisiveness was also strongly associated with behavioral indecision, a finding that helps to validate indecisiveness as a construct. We posit that the assessment of indecisiveness could be enhanced by excluding the reverse-scored items because they appear to represent decision-making confidence, a distinct construct from indecisiveness. Excluding the reverse-scored items revealed a robust link between indecisiveness and depressive symptoms, highlighting the importance of targeting this symptom in depression research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
... The most widely used measure is the Indecisiveness Scale by Frost and Shows (1993) and Lauderdale and Oakes (2021). It has been developed and used in the context of psychological disorders, but also applied to other areas (Rassin, 2007). The scale correlates with related constructs (e.g., an avoidant decision making style, Weinhardt et al., 2012;Bavolar, 2018; certain components of perfectionism, Frost and Shows, 1993;Piotrowski, 2019; or abstract-analytical rumination, Schiena et al., 2013;Piotrowski, 2019), and with symptoms of disorders associated with indecisiveness, especially from the obsessivecompulsive spectrum (Frost and Shows, 1993;Steketee et al., 2003). ...
... Likewise, indecisiveness clearly goes beyond difficulties in the evaluation of choice objects. For example, emotional components of indecisiveness, like fear of making the wrong choice (Frost and Shows, 1993), can hardly be equated with evaluation difficulties (Rassin, 2007). Thus, an operationalization of evaluation difficulties needs to differentiate indecisiveness from evaluation difficulties. ...
... To increase the likelihood to find the predicted association between evaluation difficulties and indecisiveness we derived three different operationalizations of evaluation difficulties from the literature. In line with Rassin (2007) (cf. also Germeijs and De Boeck, 2003), we consider the inability to perceive differences between choice options as an important indicator of evaluation difficulties (cf., Anderson, 2003). ...
Indecisiveness, the subjective inability to make satisfying decisions, is an individual difference trait that may impede effective actions. Mechanisms underlying indecisiveness are largely unknown. In four studies, we tested the prediction that indicators of evaluation difficulty were associated with indecisiveness in simple evaluations. Across studies, indecisiveness was measured via self-report while evaluation difficulties were derived behaviorally from three indicators: difficulty distinguishing between similar evaluation objects (i.e., standard deviation of evaluation ratings), evaluation duration (reaction times), and implicit evaluations (evaluative priming effect) using familiar everyday objects. Study 1 ( N = 151) was based on attractiveness evaluations of portraits. Studies 2a ( N = 201) and 2b ( N = 211) used chocolate as evaluation objects and manipulated to what extent the evaluations were equivalent to a decision. In Study 3 ( N = 80) evaluations were measured implicitly through evaluative priming using food pictures. Contrary to our predictions, indecisiveness showed no reliable association to any indicator of evaluation difficulty, regardless of type of evaluation object, equivalence of evaluation and decision, and whether evaluation difficulty was based on explicit or implicit evaluations. All null findings were supported by Bayes factors. These counterintuitive results are a first step toward investigating evaluation processes as potential mechanisms underlying indecisiveness, showing that for both explicit and implicit measurements, indecisiveness is not characterized by difficulties when evaluating familiar everyday objects.
... Indecisiveness is trait-like difficulty (Germeijs et al. 2006) making decisions emerging across time and situations that is distinguished from situation-specific indecision (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002;Rassin 2007).Indecisiveness is a prominent cognitive process associated with numerous disorders including Major Depressive Disorder (American Psychiatric Association 1980), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (Koerner et al. 2016), Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder (Riddle et al. 2016), and Hoarding Disorder (Frost et al. 2011;Saxena et al. 2015;Timpano et al. 2011). Indecisiveness is also associated with a range negative emotions and cognitive processes including anxiety (Lauderdale et al. 2018;McNeill et al. 2014;Rassin and Muris 2005a), worry (Rassin andMuris 2005a, Rassin et al. 2007) and depression (Di Schiena et al. 2013;Lauderdale et al. 2018;Rassin and Muris 2005a) as well as maladaptive rumination (Di Schiena et al. 2013;Rassin and Muris 2005b), emotional reactivity and distress intolerance (Crone et al. 2019), and Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU; Dugas et al. 1998;Lauderdale et al. 2018;Rassin et al. 2007). ...
... Indecisiveness is trait-like difficulty (Germeijs et al. 2006) making decisions emerging across time and situations that is distinguished from situation-specific indecision (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002;Rassin 2007).Indecisiveness is a prominent cognitive process associated with numerous disorders including Major Depressive Disorder (American Psychiatric Association 1980), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (Koerner et al. 2016), Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder (Riddle et al. 2016), and Hoarding Disorder (Frost et al. 2011;Saxena et al. 2015;Timpano et al. 2011). Indecisiveness is also associated with a range negative emotions and cognitive processes including anxiety (Lauderdale et al. 2018;McNeill et al. 2014;Rassin and Muris 2005a), worry (Rassin andMuris 2005a, Rassin et al. 2007) and depression (Di Schiena et al. 2013;Lauderdale et al. 2018;Rassin and Muris 2005a) as well as maladaptive rumination (Di Schiena et al. 2013;Rassin and Muris 2005b), emotional reactivity and distress intolerance (Crone et al. 2019), and Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU; Dugas et al. 1998;Lauderdale et al. 2018;Rassin et al. 2007). Indecisiveness is negatively correlated with well-being (Bavolar 2018) and uniquely predicts variance of wellbeing over negative affect (Taillefer et al. 2016) indicating that indecisiveness is not merely a redundant marker for emotional distress. ...
... The original IS is composed of 15 items reflecting positive and negative beliefs about decision-making. This version was modified by Rassin et al. (2007) to remove situation-specific indecision items for not reflecting the operationalization of trait indecisiveness (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002;Rassin 2007) and having marginal factor loadings. With these modifications, the revised IS was found to be as reliable and valid as the original given its internal consistency as well as the direction and magnitude of its correlations with anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and behavioral measures of indecisiveness. ...
In this investigation, we performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis on the Revised Indecisiveness Scale with a large sample (N = 500) of undergraduate students. Our results supported a two-factor structure consisting of Aversive Indecisiveness (RIS-AI) and Positive Attitudes Towards Decision-Making (RIS-Positive). RIS-AI was strongly related to risks and symptoms of anxiety and avoidance. RIS-AI was also a strong predictor of difficulties in self-appraised attentional focus.RIS-Positive was uniquely predictive of low anhedonic depression and self-appraised attentional shifting.
... In the process, by obsessing over seemingly minor issues, they achieve a level of predictability. They avoid the pain of disappointment and failure in the real world by continually playing out negative scenarios in their mind (Rassin, 2007;Stöber & Joormann, 2001b). ...
... The third major theme that arose in our analysis was the role of social support in helping to reappraise situations, or to reorient thought patterns in a realistic and constructive way. Those who are prone to worry tend to focus on the negative, or on worst case scenarios (Rassin, 2007). Moreover, worry-related thoughts tend to be abstract and less tangible in nature (Stöber, 1997), sometimes making it difficult for worriers to clearly identify and address the source of their worry (Borkovec et al., 1998). ...
... This lack of confidence is often accompanied by a fear of failure and an inability to make decisions. Those prone to worry often delay making decisions or dealing with problems out of fear of failure or making mistakes, thus leaving problems unaddressed and, paradoxically, leading to more stress and worry (Rassin, 2007;Stöber & Joormann, 2001b). Participants in this study reported that social support helped them feel more confident and motivated them to actively face challenges. ...
This study examined the role of social support in managing worry among a sample of Malaysian adults. An online questionnaire was completed by 136 participants (age M = 34, SD = 7.65; 71% female, 29% male). Each wrote open-ended, essay-type descriptions of their experiences with social support in relation to worry, as well as completing measures of pathological worry (Penn State Worry Questionnaire), normal worry (Worry Domains Questionnaire), and perceived social support (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support). Results indicated that young adults experienced a higher degree of normal worry compared to older adults, but pathological worry was not significantly different between the two groups. No significant differences in worry were found in relation to gender, ethnicity or marital status. Perceived social support was negatively related to levels of both normal and pathological worry. Qualitative analyses pointed towards four important roles for social support: providing a sense of belonging and security, providing emotional relief or catharsis, helping to reappraise situations, and facilitating problem-solving and decision-making. The role of social support as a secure base that facilitates emotion management and helps to ground thinking is discussed.
... Unfortunately, this strategy often results in more worry, anxiety, and rumination over time (see Ferrari, 2010;Ferrari & Tibbett, 2017). Rassin (2006) proposed a psychological model of indecisiveness, differentiating between predispositions, perceptions, moderators, and behaviors. Examples of factors predisposing to indecision include perfectionism and intolerance of uncertainty. ...
... Thus, we suggest that a tendency for self-critical cognition may be associated with indecision; individuals with more negative self-related thoughts are likely to also doubt their competence at tasks such as decision-making and may, in turn, delay. Self-critical cognition is viewed as a personality trait and a tendency and may therefore fit well as a predisposition within Rassin's (2006) model of indecisiveness. ...
... We propose the addition of self-critical cognition and hope to Rassin's (2006) model of indecisiveness, such that self-critical cognition would predispose or predict indecision and decreased hope would be a postdecision behavior or outcome of indecision. Therefore, we hypothesized a mediational model where selfcritical cognition predicts lower hope scores indirectly via indecision (see Figure 1). ...
background Decisional procrastination, or indecision, is the mala-daptive postponing of decision-making when faced with conflicts or choices. In the present exploratory study, we examined two factors of a psychological model toward understanding the underpinnings of indecision, namely: self-critical cognition as a predisposition to indecision and decreased hope as a post-decision behavior of indecision. Self-critical cognition is the tendency for self-related thoughts to be critical and defeating. It is hypothesized to predict indecision as self-critical individuals are likely to also doubt their competence at tasks such as decision-making and may, in turn, delay. Decreased hope is hypothesized to be an outcome of indecision as the latter is related to anxiety, worry, and life regret. participants and procedure Participants were 327 undergraduate students from a large Midwestern university (242 women, 82 men; M age = 20.31 years old). They completed the self-report measures in an online survey and received class credit for participation. results Using a bootstrap analysis of the indirect effect, the results showed that indecision mediates the relationship between self-critical cognition and decreased hope among emerging adults. conclusions Implications for future research and potential interventions to alter the pattern of indecision and to increase hope are discussed. This study moves forward the literature of indecision by examining a new predictor and outcome of indecision. key words hope; indecision; decisional procrastination; self-critical thoughts; self-criticism "I can't decide, and it upsets me": assessing self-critical cognition, indecision, and hope among young adults corresponding author
... Indecisiveness is considered a maladaptive individual difference that has been is researched across diverse fields, including consumer science (Jeong and Drolet 2016), cognitive neuroscience (Polania et al. 2015), career counseling (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002), and psychopathology (Frost and Shows 1993). Previous research suggest an important distinction between indecision, which is considered time-limited and situation-specific decisional problems, and general indecisiveness, which is considered to be trait-like decisional difficulties emerging across time and situations (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002;Rassin 2007). Using a sample of high school students, Germeijs and De Boeck (2002) demonstrated that general indecisiveness items loaded on a factor separate from items assessing situation-specific indecision and that situation-specific indecision did not predict decisional problems in other domains. ...
... In his review of general indecisiveness, Rassin (2007) speculated that IU was likely a predisposing factor influencing perceptions about decisions and potentially increasing indecisiveness. Although findings regarding the direction of the relationship between IU and indecisiveness are equivocal, investigations consistently indicate a positive relationship between decisional uncertainty, IU, and indecisiveness. ...
... This investigation also adds to the literature by indicating a robust relationship between aversive indecisiveness and IU. In his review, Rassin (2007) proposed that IU was a predisposing cognitive process that may increase risk for indecisiveness. Based on our results, it is conceivable that IU may influence decisional outcomes, at least partially, through aversive indecisiveness. ...
Indecisiveness is defined as a maladaptive trait resulting in difficulty making decisions across time and situations. Indecisiveness is positively correlated with measures of anxiety, worry, and depression and has been listed as a symptom of Major Depressive Disorder for decades. Indecisiveness is also a distinguishing cognitive process associated with other disorders, such as Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder, and Hoarding Disorder. Recently, indecisiveness has been found to be represented by two distinct dimensions, labeled aversive and avoidant indecisiveness. Aversive indecisiveness, represented by anticipation of negative consequences as a result of decision-making, is associated with behavioral inhibition and anticipated regret about decisional choices. Avoidant indecisiveness, represented by a preference for decisional delay and avoidance, is associated with a withdrawal from reinforcement. In this investigation, we assessed if aversive indecisiveness, due to its anticipation of negative consequences resulting from decisions, was more predictive of trait and cognitive risks for emotional distress as well as anxiety, depression, worry, diminished cognitive flexibility, and avoidance than avoidant indecisiveness. Using a college sample (N = 185), we found that aversive indecisiveness was uniquely predictive of neuroticism, Intolerance of Uncertainty, anxiety, depression, self-consciousness, worry, diminished cognitive flexibility, and multiple forms of avoidance over avoidant indecisiveness. These results indicate that anticipating negative outcomes resulting from decisional choices is more critical to anxiety and depression than a preference for decisional delay and avoidance. The results also provide preliminary evidence that aversive indecisiveness fits within a nomological network of risks for and experience of anxiety and depression.
... Indecisiveness is considered a maladaptive individual difference that has been is researched across diverse fields, including consumer science (Jeong and Drolet 2016), cognitive neuroscience (Polania et al. 2015), career counseling (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002), and psychopathology (Frost and Shows 1993). Previous research suggest an important distinction between indecision, which is considered time-limited and situation-specific decisional problems, and general indecisiveness, which is considered to be trait-like decisional difficulties emerging across time and situations (Germeijs and De Boeck 2002;Rassin 2007). Using a sample of high school students, Germeijs and De Boeck (2002) demonstrated that general indecisiveness items loaded on a factor separate from items assessing situation-specific indecision and that situation-specific indecision did not predict decisional problems in other domains. ...
... In his review of general indecisiveness, Rassin (2007) speculated that IU was likely a predisposing factor influencing perceptions about decisions and potentially increasing indecisiveness. ...
... This investigation also adds to the literature by indicating a robust relationship between aversive indecisiveness and IU. In his review, Rassin (2007) proposed that IU was a predisposing cognitive process that may increase risk for indecisiveness. Based on our results, it is conceivable that IU may influence decisional outcomes, at least partially, through aversive indecisiveness. ...
We found that aversive indecisiveness significantly predicted neuroticism, intolerance of uncertainty, anxiety, depression, self-consciousness, worry, experiential avoidance, and multiple other forms of avoidance over avoidant indecisiveness.
... Esos problemas se refieren a la carencia de información, problemas en la valoración e incertidumbre de resultados, generando comportamientos tales como retardo, visión de túnel y comportamientos disfuncionales como preocupación. La indecisión se ha descrito como un rasgo (Rassin, 2007), que es específico de la toma de decisiones (Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011a; Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011b), y se caracteriza por problemas habituales en la toma de decisiones tales como, procastinar, sensaciones de incertidumbre durante el proceso de toma de decisiones, una tendencia a posponer y evitar decisiones, dejar la toma de decisiones a otros; búsqueda de información adicional, y problemas postdecionales, que se refiere a la tendencia a lamentarse y preocuparse sobre las decisiones tomadas (Germeijs y De Boeck, 2002, Rassin, 2007. Todos estos problemas de la toma de decisiones asociados a la indecisión se pueden interpretar como características de procesos, es decir, pertenecen al proceso de la toma de decisiones (p.ej;. ...
... Esos problemas se refieren a la carencia de información, problemas en la valoración e incertidumbre de resultados, generando comportamientos tales como retardo, visión de túnel y comportamientos disfuncionales como preocupación. La indecisión se ha descrito como un rasgo (Rassin, 2007), que es específico de la toma de decisiones (Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011a; Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011b), y se caracteriza por problemas habituales en la toma de decisiones tales como, procastinar, sensaciones de incertidumbre durante el proceso de toma de decisiones, una tendencia a posponer y evitar decisiones, dejar la toma de decisiones a otros; búsqueda de información adicional, y problemas postdecionales, que se refiere a la tendencia a lamentarse y preocuparse sobre las decisiones tomadas (Germeijs y De Boeck, 2002, Rassin, 2007. Todos estos problemas de la toma de decisiones asociados a la indecisión se pueden interpretar como características de procesos, es decir, pertenecen al proceso de la toma de decisiones (p.ej;. ...
... Una posible explicación a los resultados encontrados en esta muestra de adolescentes, se funda en la propuesta del modelo conceptual de la indecisión, donde Rassin propone como factores de predisposición de la indecisión, entre otros, la intolerancia a la incertidumbre y el perfeccionismo (Rassin, 2007), que de alguna manera promueven la búsqueda de información o certeza ante las dudas en el momento de actuar o decidir. De tal forma que la intolerancia a la incertidumbre, o más concretamente, el factor denominado incertidumbre generadora de inhibición o ansiedad inhibitoria (Carleton et al., 2007;Mc Evoy y Mahoney, 2011), se incrementa ante diversas situaciones ambiguas o amenazantes, por lo que las personas más indecisas experimentan más ansiedad o emocionalidad y preocupación en la toma de decisiones, generando posiblemente malestar postdecisional. ...
RESUMEN En este trabajo se estudia la vulnerabilidad cognitiva, patrón cognitivo de creencias y actitudes que facilita la predisposición a algún desajuste psicológico, vinculado a procesos como la intolerancia a la incertidumbre, la evitación cognitiva, la sensibilidad a la ansiedad, la indecisión, la tendencia a la preocupación y emocionalidad, se relacionan con situaciones ambiguas e inequívocamente positivas y negativas, en una muestra de 102 adolescentes. El alcance de este estudio es de tipo exploratorio.Los resultados muestran las relaciones de esos procesos cognitivos y emocionalidad con las situaciones ambiguas e inequívocamente negativas, pero no con las situaciones positivas. En cuando a la predicción, los procesos de incertidumbre generadora de inhibición, el miedo a las sensaciones físicas y la indecisión son compartidos por las situaciones ambiguas e inequívocamente negativas. En la predicción de las situaciones ambiguas, además de los tres procesos anteriores intervienen la tendencia a la preocupación y una estrategia de evitación cognitiva, la distracción, sin embargo para las situaciones inequívocamente negativas, es emocionalidad la variable predictora. Los resultados configuran una primera aproximación con muestras adolescentes y se discuten atendiendo al modelo cognitivo de la motivación (Mogg y Bradley, 1998; Williams, Watts, MacLeod, y Mathews, 1997) y el modelo de estilos de afrontamiento (Krohne, 2011), que enfatizan un proceso de vigilancia y evitación ante estilos ambiguos o amenazantes. PALABRAS CLAVES: vulnerabilidad cognitiva-emocionalidad-situaciones ambiguas-adolescentes. ABSTRACT In this work we study the cognitive vulnerability, cognitive pattern of beliefs and attitudes that facilitates the predisposition to some psychological maladjustment, linked to processes such as intolerance of uncertainty, cognitive avoidance, anxiety sensitivity, indecision is studied, the tendency to worry and emotionality relate to ambiguous and unequivocally positive and negative, in a sample of 102 adolescents situations. The scope of this study is of type exploratorio.Los results show the relationships of these cognitive processes and emotional with ambiguous situations and unequivocally negative but not positive situations. As for the prediction processes generating inhibition uncertainty, fear of physical sensations and indecision are shared by the ambiguous and unambiguous negative situations. In the prediction of ambiguous situations, besides the three above processes involved tend to worry and cognitive avoidance strategy, distraction, however for unambiguously negative situations, emotionality the predictor variable. The results constitute a first approach to adolescent samples and discussed taking into account the cognitive model of motivation (Mogg and Bradley, 1998; Williams, Watts, MacLeod, and Mathews, 1997) and the model of coping styles (Krohne, 2011), emphasizing a process of monitoring and avoidance to ambiguous or threatening styles. KEY WORDS: vulnerability cognitive-emotionality-ambiguous situations-teens. INTRODUCCIÓN El miedo y la ansiedad son emociones normales que constituyen una respuesta adaptativa habitual de las personas frente a diversas situaciones, pues ante una señal de peligro o amenaza, se produce una reacción que nos ayuda a enfrentarnos y a responder a los mismos. Sin embargo, estas emociones pueden ser disfuncionales cuando la persona responde a los estímulos ambiguos, inofensivos o neutros como si fueran amenazantes o peligrosos (Lundh y Öst, 2001). Así, la identificación de objetos o situaciones que pudieran amenazar a la supervivencia de un organismo activa los procesos cognitivos, afectivos, psicofisiológicos y conductuales que sirven para garantizar la seguridad del mismo (LeDoux, 1996). En el caso de la ansiedad clínica existe una sobreactivación de los procesos antes mencionados (Barlow, 2002).
... Esos problemas se refieren a la carencia de información, problemas en la valoración e incertidumbre de resultados, generando comportamientos tales como retardo, visión de túnel y comportamientos disfuncionales como preocupación. La indecisión se ha descrito como un rasgo (Rassin, 2007), que es específico de la toma de decisiones (Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011a; Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011b), y se caracteriza por problemas habituales en la toma de decisiones tales como, procastinar, sensaciones de incertidumbre durante el proceso de toma de decisiones, una tendencia a posponer y evitar decisiones, dejar la toma de decisiones a otros; búsqueda de información adicional, y problemas postdecionales, que se refiere a la tendencia a lamentarse y preocuparse sobre las decisiones tomadas (Germeijs y De Boeck, 2002, Rassin, 2007. Todos estos problemas de la toma de decisiones asociados a la indecisión se pueden interpretar como características de procesos, es decir, pertenecen al proceso de la toma de decisiones (p.ej;. ...
... Esos problemas se refieren a la carencia de información, problemas en la valoración e incertidumbre de resultados, generando comportamientos tales como retardo, visión de túnel y comportamientos disfuncionales como preocupación. La indecisión se ha descrito como un rasgo (Rassin, 2007), que es específico de la toma de decisiones (Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011a; Germeijs y Verschueren, 2011b), y se caracteriza por problemas habituales en la toma de decisiones tales como, procastinar, sensaciones de incertidumbre durante el proceso de toma de decisiones, una tendencia a posponer y evitar decisiones, dejar la toma de decisiones a otros; búsqueda de información adicional, y problemas postdecionales, que se refiere a la tendencia a lamentarse y preocuparse sobre las decisiones tomadas (Germeijs y De Boeck, 2002, Rassin, 2007. Todos estos problemas de la toma de decisiones asociados a la indecisión se pueden interpretar como características de procesos, es decir, pertenecen al proceso de la toma de decisiones (p.ej;. ...
... Una posible explicación a los resultados encontrados en esta muestra de adolescentes, se funda en la propuesta del modelo conceptual de la indecisión, donde Rassin propone como factores de predisposición de la indecisión, entre otros, la intolerancia a la incertidumbre y el perfeccionismo (Rassin, 2007), que de alguna manera promueven la búsqueda de información o certeza ante las dudas en el momento de actuar o decidir. De tal forma que la intolerancia a la incertidumbre, o más concretamente, el factor denominado incertidumbre generadora de inhibición o ansiedad inhibitoria (Carleton et al., 2007;Mc Evoy y Mahoney, 2011), se incrementa ante diversas situaciones ambiguas o amenazantes, por lo que las personas más indecisas experimentan más ansiedad o emocionalidad y preocupación en la toma de decisiones, generando posiblemente malestar postdecisional. ...
In this work we study the cognitive vulnerability, cognitive pattern of beliefs and attitudes that facilitates the predisposition to some psychological maladjustment, linked to processes such as intolerance of uncertainty, cognitive avoidance, anxiety sensitivity, indecision is studied, the tendency to worry and emotionality relate to ambiguous and unequivocally positive and negative, in a sample of 102 adolescents situations. The scope of this study is of type exploratorio.Los results show the relationships of these cognitive processes and emotional with ambiguous situations and unequivocally negative but not positive situations. As for the prediction processes generating inhibition uncertainty, fear of physical sensations and indecision are shared by the ambiguous and unambiguous negative situations. In the prediction of ambiguous situations, besides the three above processes involved tend to worry and cognitive avoidance strategy, distraction, however for unambiguously negative situations, emotionality the predictor variable. The results constitute a first approach to adolescent samples and discussed taking into account the cognitive model of motivation (Mogg and Bradley, 1998; Williams, Watts, MacLeod, and Mathews, 1997) and the model of coping styles (Krohne, 2011), emphasizing a process of monitoring and avoidance to ambiguous or threatening styles.
... While no past research on indecisiveness and simulation game participation could be found, Rassin (2007) reports on the body of research on the "concept of indecisiveness" (p. 1) and then offers a theory of indecisiveness. Rassin (2007) presents indecisiveness as a psychological concept composed of predispositions, perceptions and behaviours that are affected by moderators. ...
... While no past research on indecisiveness and simulation game participation could be found, Rassin (2007) reports on the body of research on the "concept of indecisiveness" (p. 1) and then offers a theory of indecisiveness. Rassin (2007) presents indecisiveness as a psychological concept composed of predispositions, perceptions and behaviours that are affected by moderators. The actual trait involves perceptions that are measured through the use and application of psychometric measurement scales. ...
... The actual trait involves perceptions that are measured through the use and application of psychometric measurement scales. In his model, Rassin (2007) presents the situation of maximizing behavior, compensatory choices and intolerance of uncertainty as predispositions which affect three perceptions which comprise the trait of indecisiveness: 1) a perceived lack of information, 2) valuation problems, and 3) outcome uncertainty. The perceptions then result in three types of behavior: 1) delaying decision making by procrastinating, avoiding the decision, and gathering more information; 2) narrowing the decision by ignoring information, focusing in on one choice, and using one dimension to compare multiple choices; and 3) post-decision behaviours such as worrying about its correctness, checking over the decision, and changing the decision. ...
Background. The evidence from past research suggests that business simulation games (BSGs) do offer a meaningful educational experience. One characteristic lacking across past research studies is the trait of indecisiveness.
Aim. This study sought to explore whether business students would self-report a change in their perceptions of their indecisiveness after participating in a business simulation games (BSG). In addition, whether higher performance simulation decision makers would self-report being less indecisive (i.e. able to make decisions in a timely manner) than lower performance simulation decision makers.
Method. Using a pre-test and post-test design with a comparison to an untreated control group, the change in 386 business students’ perceptions of their indecisiveness was assessed using a self-reporting questionnaire.
Results. The findings showed a statistically significant reduction in the level of perceived indecisiveness as a result of the simulation experience. The higher performance students reported being less indecisive than lower performance students while both higher performance and lower performance students reported a reduction in perceived indecisiveness. The level of self-reported perceived indecisiveness amongst a control group of 137 business students indicated no significant change.
Conclusion. If the combination of practice and positive reinforcement increases the comfort level (reduce feelings of risk and threat) of decision makers then perceived indecisiveness should decrease as a result of simulation participation, which may generalize across situations demanding decisions.
... Indecisiveness is "the general tendency to experience decision difficulties" (Rassin, 2007, p. 11). Indecisiveness (for a review, see Rassin, 2007) has a hypothesized importance in OCD, based on both self-reported indecisiveness as a clinical symptom, and the shared cognitive capacity of executive functioning, which is necessary for decision-making, and is thought to be impaired in OCD (Cavedini, Riboldi, Keller, D'Annucci, & Bellodi, 2002;Dittrich & Johansen, 2013). More specifically, Sachdev and Malhi (2005) highlighted the substantial overlap between the neurological circuitry required for cognitive performance and decision making, and the neurological circuitry implicated in OCD. ...
... Our focus here is on self-reported indecisiveness (IS) as assessed by a validated self-report measure of indecisiveness (Frost & Shows, 1993). This type of IS has received little attention in OCD patients (Rassin, 2007), but has been a focus of research in nonclinical samples. Findings from these investigations suggest that IS may be a threat to effective daily functioning in individuals without psychopathology, although research is limited (Rassin & Muris, 2005). ...
... In a second aim of this study, we sought to determine whether the relationship between IS and QOL is stronger for people with more OCD symptoms, relative to those with fewer OCD symptoms. That this might be so was suggested by Rassin andMuris (2005, p. 1176), who mentioned that IS may be problematic for people without psychopathology but actually "handicapping" for those with OCD. This idea implies that the degree of OCD symptoms may moderate the relationship between IS and QOL, such that IS would be especially strongly correlated with QOL in those with high OCD symptoms, and lesser correlated with QOL in those with fewer OCD symptoms. ...
It is well established that individuals with symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) may experience compromised quality of life (QOL). For example, Jacoby et al. (2014) found that depression was the most significant predictor of QOL among treatment-seeking OCD patients, beyond OCD-related cognitions, symptoms, and anxiety. Despite previous research indicating that indecisiveness is an important construct relevant to OCD, however, indecisiveness is often not measured in studies examining predictors of QOL. Accordingly, the current study sought to extend this literature in a sample of 88 nonclinical participants varying in OCD symptoms. We addressed two questions: whether indecisiveness would predict QOL beyond other measures, and whether the relationship between indecisiveness and QOL was stronger in those with more OCD symptoms. Findings revealed that indecisiveness significantly predicted QOL when other variables were controlled, but OCD symptoms did not moderate the relationship between IS and QOL. Taken together, the findings suggest that indecisiveness could be an important construct with implications for QOL in nonclinical individuals. Future studies should examine the link between QOL and indecisiveness in OCD patients and the underlying mechanisms that may contribute to this relationship.
... In spite of the importance of the previous studies, the scientific literature on the understanding of indecisiveness is still limited, or even a clear definition of indecisiveness is lacking [10]. Usually, for measuring indecisiveness, some questions (e.g. ...
... The first research direction on the study of indecisiveness is the measurement of indecisiveness based on behavioral characteristics [9]- [12]. Actually, the scientific literature on indecisiveness is rather limited and even a clear definition of indecisiveness is lacking [10]. Fortunately, several scales for indecisiveness have been constructed and then used to investigate distinctive features of indecisiveness. ...
... We still let F(Length(S j ), Entropy(S j ), T rans(S j )) in Definition 1 equal to Length(S j ) * Entropy(S j ) * T rans(S j ). Indeed, it is not easy to directly evaluate the reasonability of the measurement, since even a clear definition of indecisiveness is lacking [10]. As an alternative, the performance of the measurement could be further proved by the applications, e.g. the item bundles recommendation, which will be shown lately. ...
... The overlap between IU and a tendency to be indecisive has also been explored. According to Rassin (2007), indecisiveness "refers to the experience of decision problems (i.e. lack of information, valuation difficulty, and outcome uncertainty) resulting in overt choice-related behaviors such as delay, tunnel vision and post-decision dysfunctional behavior (e.g. ...
... " Rassin and Muris (2005) argued that IU is conceptually similar to indecisiveness in that both are likely to promote catastrophic interpretations of ambiguous situations and overly cautious decision-making. In his theory of indecisiveness, Rassin (2007) suggested that IU may even be a predisposing factor for indecisiveness. In a sample of 50 undergraduate students, Rassin and Muris (2005) observed a strong association (r = .62) ...
A number of studies have examined the association of intolerance of uncertainty (IU) to trait worry and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). However, few studies have examined the extent of overlap between IU and other psychological constructs that bear conceptual resemblance to IU, despite the fact that IU-type constructs have been discussed and examined extensively within psychology and other disciplines. The present study investigated (1) the associations of IU, trait worry, and GAD status to a negative risk orientation, trait curiosity, indecisiveness, perceived constraints, self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism, intolerance of ambiguity, the need for predictability, and the need for order and structure and (2) whether IU is a unique correlate of trait worry and of the presence versus absence of Probable GAD, when overlap with other uncertainty-relevant constructs is accounted for. N = 255 adults completed self-report measures of the aforementioned constructs. Each of the constructs was significantly associated with IU. Only IU, and a subset of the other uncertainty-relevant constructs were correlated with trait worry or distinguished the Probable GAD group from the Non-GAD group. IU was the strongest unique correlate of trait worry and of the presence versus absence of Probable GAD. Indecisiveness, self-oriented perfectionism and the need for predictability were also unique correlates of trait worry or GAD status. Implications of the findings are discussed, in particular as they pertain to the definition, conceptualization, and cognitive-behavioral treatment of IU in GAD.
... Personal indecisiveness involves some chronic decision making problems, such as longer periods of decision making, the feeling of uncertainty throughout the decision making process, the tendency to postpone and escape from decisions, the feeling of worry and regret after decisions, decision instability, handing the decision over to someone else, and leaving the decision making to others (Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011;Rassin, 2007;Van Matre & Cooper, 1984). These problems obstruct individuals from organizing their own surroundings and thoughts in a fast and consistent way (Rassin & Muris, 2005). ...
... As stated above, research has shown that personal indecisiveness associated with some personality characteristics. Moreover the structure of personal indecisiveness has still been investigated (Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011;Rassin, 2007;Rassin & Muris, 2005). Therefore, the present study aims to contribute more in conceptualizing personal indecisiveness by examining some personality characteristics such as big five personality characteristics, and selfesteem. ...
The purpose of this study is to examine whether the five-factor personality characteristics and self-esteem predict two subtypes of personal indecisiveness (exploratory indecisiveness and impetuous indecisiveness). A total of 483 students (269 female and 208 male students, 6 of the students did not state gender) studying at the various faculties of Gazi University participated in the study. The results show that both exploratory and impetuous indecisiveness are significantly and positively correlated to neuroticism, and are significantly and negatively correlated to extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and self-esteem. Exploratory indecisiveness is not correlated with agreeableness. Self-esteem was found to be the strongest predictor of exploratory indecisiveness, followed by neuroticism and extraversion. The strongest predictor of impetuous indecisiveness was found to be neuroticism, followed by self-esteem, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. The findings are discussed within the scope of the relevant literature.
... Deciding is one of the most important activities in our lives because we have to make decisions constantly. Some people have more difficulties with decisionmaking than others; therefore, it seems plausible that there are individual differences in the extent to which we experience such difficulties with making decision (Rassin, 2007). There has long been interest on the part of the counselors in understanding the dynamics of undecided students. ...
... However, some researchers have recently demonstrated that indecisiveness is distinct from other forms of indecision (e.g., Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002). Specifically, indecisiveness can be defined as a trait (Rassin, 2007) characterized by a chronic problem with making decisions across situations and domains (Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Patalano & Wengrovitz, 2006). Research findings have shown that indecisiveness has a significant negative impact on individuals' behavior during the process of making specific decisions. ...
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship among adolescents’ indecisiveness, adolescents’ self-esteem, and maternal and paternal psychological control by focusing on the differences in the relationship among these variables across adolescent genders. A total of 381 Italian adolescents (215 boys and 166 girls), aged from 13 to 17 years, completed self-report measures of parental psychological control, self-esteem and indecisiveness. Since previous studies have highlighted indirect relations between family characteristics and indecisiveness, structural equation modeling (SEM) methods were used for testing self-esteem as a possible mediator. In particular, a multiple group analysis (based on adolescent genders) was conducted to determine if the resultant model differed for boys and girls. The results showed that self-esteem acted as mediator of the relation between paternal psychological control and boys’ indecisiveness. Moreover, this study shows how maternal and paternal psychological control is differently related to children’s development during early adolescence, emphasizing the important relationship between paternal psychological control and boys’ indecisiveness.
... Deciding is one of the most important activities in our lives because we have to make decisions constantly. Some people have more difficulties with decisionmaking than others; therefore, it seems plausible that there are individual differences in the extent to which we experience such difficulties with making decision (Rassin, 2007). There has long been interest on the part of the counselors in understanding the dynamics of undecided students. ...
... However, some researchers have recently demonstrated that indecisiveness is distinct from other forms of indecision (e.g., Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002). Specifically, indecisiveness can be defined as a trait (Rassin, 2007) characterized by a chronic problem with making decisions across situations and domains (Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Patalano & Wengrovitz, 2006). Research findings have shown that indecisiveness has a significant negative impact on individuals' behavior during the process of making specific decisions. ...
In this study, we explored the unique and common contributions of anxiety, self-esteem, and family communication on indecisiveness among adolescents. Three hundred and fifty pupils from 13 to 16 years of age completed self-report measures on indecisiveness, quality of family communication, trait anxiety, and self-esteem. The findings in this study showed that students’ indecisiveness is predicted by family communication mediated by anxiety and self-esteem. These results have important implications for practice as it stresses the importance of anxiety and self-esteem. Nevertheless, the counselors could also focus on enhancing relationship-building skills by introducing the adolescents’ career formation as an adolescent–parent joint project.
... Indecisiveness is a problematic trait that appears both in clinical populations, where it is associated with depression, dependent personality disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (cf. Rassin, 2007), and in normal populations, where it is associated with depressive and obsessive-compulsive symptoms, trait anxiety, and worry proneness (Frost & Shows, 1993;Rassin & Muris, 2005b;Rassin, Muris, Franken, Smit, & Wong, 2007). Despite its problematic nature, indecisiveness continues to be poorly understood. ...
... Maximizers approach decisions with the unrealistically high expectation that they will find the best alternative possible; this expectation, in turn, has the ironic effect of making the individual more prone to anticipating and experiencing regret (Schwartz et al., 2002). Not surprisingly, then, maximization is believed to be a dispositional antecedent to indecisiveness (Rassin, 2007). As suggested by the link between maximization and regret proneness, we hypothesize that this relationship is specific to aversive indecisiveness and that the relationship is mediated by regret proneness. ...
Though indecisiveness is associated with several mental disorders and a range of problematic psychological outcomes in normal populations, it is still poorly understood. We distinguish two features of indecisiveness: (a) aversive, a generalized aversion for decisions that manifests as threat-oriented cognition and negative affect when making decisions, and (b) avoidant, a generalized motivation to avoid decisions and to experience difficulties making decisions. Using exploratory (Study 1) and confirmatory (Study 2) factor analyses, we show that the Indecisiveness Scale (Frost & Shows, 1993) possesses factors reflecting these two features. Moreover, we use correlation and regression to test hypotheses regarding the relationships among these components of indecisiveness and regret proneness, maximization, and BIS and BAS sensitivities. Results suggest the utility of distinguishing aversive from avoidant indecisiveness as well as characterizing stable attitudes towards decisions in terms of basic personality processes.
... This view is shared by Sachdev and Malhi (2005), who described it as difficulty making decisions or poor confidence in decisions. Rassin (2007) implicated doubt as "resulting in overt choice-related behaviours" such as delays and post-decision rumination. ...
... We also note that, upon entering the lab, subjects could see the different headsets displayed on a table at the front of the room. 3 See, for example,Germeijs and De Boeck (2002),Rassin (2007), and references therein.4 In an earlier version of this paper, we used these responses to transform the single-or empty-valued choice functions into multi-or empty-valued choice correspondences, aiming to give both FC and NFC ...
We report on two novel choice experiments with real goods where subjects in one treatment are forced to choose, as is the norm in economic experiments, while in the other they are not but can instead incur a small cost to defer choice. Using a variety of measures, we find that the active choices (i.e., those that exclude the deferral outside option) of subjects in the nonforced‐choice treatment are generally more consistent. We also find that the combined deferral and active‐choice behavior of subjects in that treatment is explained better by a model of dominant choice with incomplete preferences than it is by rational choice. Our results suggest that nonforced‐choice experiments and models can be helpful in separating people's rational, hesitant/not‐yet‐rational and genuinely irrational behavior, and can potentially offer important new insights in revealed preference analysis.
... Ďalšou črtou, ktorá sa spája s rozhodovaním a zároveň istým spôsobom ovplyvňuje aj výsledky rozhodnutia je nerozhodnosť. Je to črta, ktorá predstavuje ťažkosti pri robení rozhodnutí a to naprieč časom a rôznymi situáciami, pričom je v tomto prípade potrebné rozlišovať od situačne špecifickej nerozhodnosti (Rassin, 2007). ...
The expanding technological possibilities have opened up space for the detection of psychophysiological changes and behavioral manifestations by non-contact methods that do not interfere with normal interaction. This paper aims to present the experimental design and data of the first pilot case study applying functional infrared thermal imaging and emotional expression analysis for deception detection. In the pilot psychophysiological experiment, we focused on monitoring changes in facial temperature, heart rate variability, and overall facial emotional expression during prepared and spontaneous lie scenarios spoken towards different interviewers.
... na temat podecyzyjnego żalu itp. Rassin (2007) wysunął więc hipotezę, że osoby, którym brakuje zdecydowania, są motywowane do poszukiwania obszernej informacji o alternatywach wyboru, po to, żeby dokonać optymalnego wyboru. Patalano, Juhasz i Dicke (2010) testowali tę hipotezę, prowadząc zaawansowane badanie nad procesem gromadzenia informacji przed podjęciem decyzji. ...
... Pilot experts reported that airline guidelines were theoretically applicable in the questionnaire scenarios. Indecision may be an indicator of (a) evaluation difficulty of the situation and decision complexity due to outcome uncertainty, (b) a lack of information or (c) nonfamiliarity with decisions (Anderson, 2003;Rassin, 2007). Further; pilot experts emphasized that indecisiveness in a dynamic situation could be described as momentary persistence in the current action plan. ...
Personality has an important influence on the variability in human decision making. Little is known whether intensive training and a highly-procedural environment can alleviate the influence of personality on decision making. Here, we address this issue by investigating the influence of impulsivity as personality factor on decision making among airline pilots. We showed that impulsivity modulated pilots' indecisiveness in uncertain decision scenarios as well as pilots' self-reported compliance to airline guidelines in real life. This result suggests that the personality factor impulsivity is a profound trait that continues to have an influence through intensive training and highly-procedural decision situations.
... For example, psychology studies have connected indecision to perceived uncertainty, arguing that the more actors feel unable to say which action will produce which outcome, the more they remain stuck in alternative scenarios and feel unable to show clear preference for either of them. Lack of information, valuation difficulty, and outcome uncertainty, are said to be the pillars of indecision biases (see Anderson, 2003;Rassin, 2007). ...
Drawing on the literature on inter-organizational and hybrid partnerships, we put forth a process-based perspective on the evolution of regional innovation systems (RIS), with particular attention to the changing role of TTOs throughout the RIS lifecycle. We theorize on how perceptions of environmental turbulence (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity, in short VUCA) may influence partners’ decisions to adopt a given organization model for the broker/TTO that manages the partnership. We show that perceptions of environmental turbulence may lead to a set of possible decision pathologies at the partnership level that interfere with the organizational structure of the TTO. We suggest that perceptions of turbulence and decision pathologies play an important part in explaining RIS may deviate from the intended direction or produce outcomes that are unexpected.
... Given that provided exercises differed for younger relative to older participants and age related to perceived choice, perceived volition and intentions to persevere, all analyses systematically controlled for the categorical variable of age (contrasting rope skippers younger than 15 with those 15 or older). In addition, we systematically controlled for participants' indecisiveness due to its potential role during and after the decision making process (Rassin, 2007). ...
... We do not suggest that people should make decisions without taking available information into account or without looking for additional information, but as outlined in our introduction, there are situations in which abundant information can have detrimental effects. In his model of indecisiveness, Rassin (2006) names information search as a delaying behavior when people are undecided. Likewise, Schrift and Parker (2014) describe searching for information as a "no-choice option", along with procrastinating and deferring judgments. ...
When deciding between two options, settling can be difficult if one option is superior on one dimension but inferior on another. To arrive at a conclusion, people may gather further information, thereby running the risk of prolonging or blocking the decision-making process or even making suboptimal decisions. Here, we suggest that random decision aids may prove fruitful by reducing the need for further information. Five experiments (total N = 997) examined how information need is influenced after making a preliminary decision between two options and then receiving a suggestion from a random decision aid (a coin flip). Across studies, coin participants are less likely to request additional information (Study 1 and two follow-up studies, combined p = .021) and indicate a lower need for additional information (Study 2, p = .023, and Study 3, p = .001) compared to a control condition without a coin flip. Interestingly, participants do not necessarily adhere to the coin but stick to their preliminary decision as much as or even more than the control group, suggesting that the decision aid does not determine the decision outcome. This is true for hypothetical decisions between changing versus maintaining the status quo without an objectively correct solution (Studies 1, 1b, and 1c), for a decision between two options with an objectively correct solution (Study 2), and for a real monetary decision without an objectively correct solution (Study 3). Random decision aids may thus help to avoid decision blocks or the collection of too much information.
... Within the specific procrastination literature a strong debate emerged about whether decisional procrastination and general (or behavioral) procrastination are two overlapping constructs (Tibbett & Ferrari, 2015). Because of their high correlation, decisional procrastination should not be considered separately from general procrastination (Steel, 2007(Steel, , 2010, for instance, in line with Rassin's (2007) model of indecisiveness according to which procrastination is a manifestation of indecisiveness. Conversely, when defined as a kind of decision avoidance, the construct should be analyzed independently from general procrastination (e.g., Anderson, 2003). ...
Generally conceptualized as a failure of performance, procrastination has been a central focus of psycho-educational research. Among the various facets of the construct, decisional procrastination has been scarcely analyzed in relation with self-regulated learning strategies. Assuming a cognitive standpoint we investigated the linkage between decisional procrastination and metacognitive beliefs about procrastination, taking into account self-regulated learning strategies as potential mediators. A sample of 296 undergraduate students filled out a questionnaire measuring metacognitive beliefs about procrastination, concentration on academic tasks and interests in academic success, and decisional procrastination. The hypothesized model was partially confirmed: Results from structural equation model indicated that: (1) positive metacognitive beliefs about procrastination had an adverse impact on both concentration and interests; (2) concentration mediated the relationship between positive metacognitions and decisional procrastination. Although the results were preliminary in nature, they provided a basis for examining procrastination as a barrier to academic success. Some professional indications for education were suggested.
... Moreover, they are more threatened by ambiguous situations (Rassin & Muris, 2005a) and that may result in their tendency to postpone decisions (Rassin & Muris, 2005b). Rassin (2007) has summarised eight behavioural manifestations of indecisiveness classified into three categories: delay (procrastination, avoidance, information search), tunnelling (narrowed search, tunnel vision), and post-decision (worrying, checking, decision instability) and these process characteristics are probably responsible for poorer decision outcomes. People with higher scores in indecisiveness have difficulties in making decisions in a variety of situations (e.g., choosing college majors (Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002;Gayton et al., 1994) or careers (Gati, Krausz & Osipow, 1996;Santos, Ferreira & Gonçalves, 2014). ...
The study investigates the psychometric characteristics of the Slovak version of the original and short form of the Indecisiveness Scale on three samples of university students and one general population sample. An exploratory as well as confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the one factor structure of the scale with a satisfactory internal consistency and time stability of scores. The criterion validity was examined through relationships with thinking styles, decision-making styles, the Big Five factors, decision outcomes, well-being and perceived stress, as well as through a comparison of the general population sample with a sample with an obsessive-compulsive disorder diagnosis. Subjects who self-reported as undecided in their future intentions regarding migration tendencies had higher scores in indecisiveness. Both examined forms of the Slovak version of the Indecisiveness Scale were demonstrated to be reliable and valid instruments for the measurement of indecisiveness with the short form being favorited as more appropriately tapping into the core aspect of indecisiveness.
... Thus, fear of responsibility for harm, and the ensuing guilt may not only prolong decision-making for scenarios involving harm and safety but also result in doubt about decisions already made (fuelled by ever new ideas about possible inadequate behaviour), consequently evoking the urge to repeat the compulsion. This is consistent with a theory of indecisiveness put forth by Rassin (2007), which proposes that predisposing factors (e.g., perfectionism) contribute to specific perceptions that lead to indecisive behaviours. It may therefore be that heightened fear of guilt is one such predisposing factor for indecisiveness. ...
People with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are often indecisive, yet the factors driving that indecisiveness are not well-understood. Meanwhile, research suggests that fear of guilt is characteristic of OCD and that it may influence decision-making, but few studies have examined that relationship directly. This study therefore explored whether fear of guilt predicts decision-making parameters, such as the amount and type of information required to make decisions, decision latency, and the subjective experience of making decisions. Sixty-three undergraduate students were given 12 hypothetical scenarios in which a decision had to be made to ensure safety and avoid harm. There were no limits on deliberation time, and participants could request up to four pieces of information before making decisions. Fear of guilt was associated with the need for more information before making a decision, but not more time to make a decision, and predicted greater difficulty making decisions, lower confidence that the right decisions were made, and less satisfaction with decisions. It was also associated with a preference for opinion-based information rather than fact, but for global opinion instead of a single authority. Fear of guilt may thus be a factor in the indecisiveness and perseveration observed in OCD and warrants further exploration.
... O segundo constructo que gostaríamos de referir é a indecisão generalizada ou crónica (indecisiveness), isto é, uma dificuldade global para tomar decisões em vários domínios de vida (Germeijs e De Boeck, 2002;Rassin, 2007;Salomone, 1982;Santos, 2007). Para algumas pessoas tomar uma decisão é uma tarefa particularmente difícil para quase todas as escolhas que enfrentam. ...
... Verschueren, 2011; Rassin, 2007) ?????????? ??????? (????????? 2007)???? ????????????? 1 ?????????? ?? (Patalano & Wengrovitz, 2006) ???????? ??????????????? (Spunt, Rassin, & Epstein, 2009 ...
Previous research has explored whether the Japanese concept of Indecisiveness is different from western cultures. The aim of the study was to develop a questionnaire scale to measure the concept of Japanese Indecisiveness (Yujufudan). In the first study, a factor analysis was carried out using data from 255 college students. Four different factors, “reflection” “procrastination” “referring to others” and “anxiety” were obtained. In the second study, a decision-making task was administered to 55 college students. The scores obtained from the factor analysis in the first study predicted performance on the decision-making task. These results demonstrated the validity and reliability for the Japanese Indecisiveness Scale to measure Japanese Indecisiveness (Yujufudan).
... Whether or not a behavior is "rational" should not determine what constitutes maximization. Rassin, 2007;Schwartz, 2004;Schwartz et al., 2002;Zeelenberg & Pieters, 2007). 11 Since Schwartz et al.'s (2002) initial study, much of the interest in maximization as an individual difference has focused on the potential outcomes of maximization, but including outcomes in the definition of a construct, as maximization scales that measure decision difficulty and regret do, impedes the study of consequences of a construct. ...
Building on Herbert Simon's critique of rational choice theory, Schwartz et al. (2002) proposed that when making choices, some individuals — maximizers — search extensively through many alternatives with the goal of making the best choice, whereas others — satisficers — search only until they identify an option that meets their standards, which they then choose. They developed the Maximization Scale (MS) to measure individual differences in maximization, and a substantial amount of research has now examined maximization using the MS, painting a picture of maximizers that is generally negative. Recently, however, several researchers have criticized the MS, and almost a dozen new measures of maximization have now been published, resulting in a befuddling and contradictory literature. We seek to clarify the confusing literature on the measurement of maximization to help make sense of the existing findings and to facilitate future research. We begin by briefly summarizing the understanding of maximizers that has emerged through research using Schwartz et al.'s MS. We then review the literature on the measurement of maximization, attempting to identify the similarities and differences among the 11 published measures of maximization. Next, we propose a two-component model of maximization, outlining our view of how maximization should be conceptualized and measured. Our model posits that maximization is best understood as the pursuit of the maximization goal of choosing the best option through the maximization strategy of alternative search; other constructs such as decision difficulty and regret are best considered outcomes or causes — rather than components — of maximization. We discuss the implications of our review and model for research on maximization, highlighting what we see as pressing unanswered questions and important directions for future investigations.
... A primeira foi a Indecisiveness Scale (IS; Frost & Gross, 1993) que foi desenvolvida no campo da psicologia clínica, tendo sido usada na investigação sobre perturbações obsessivocompulsivas e acumulação compulsiva (Frost & Shows, 1993;Frost, Tolin, Steketee, & Oh, 2011). A IS é a escala de avaliação da indecisividade mais utilizada na investigação psicológica (Rassin, 2007), tendo sido já utilizada em estudos no âmbito da psicologia vocacional (Saka & Gati, 2007). ...
Career indecision is currently considered a complex construct because difficulties in career choices can be explained by several factors. One of the types of indecision that has most aroused the interest of researchers is indecisiveness, a persistent difficulty of making decisions in several life contexts. This article presents a literature review about indecisiveness, describing how it has been conceptualized and its evolution in terms of research and assessment. It also presents the findings of recent studies that have contributed with significant insights to the comprehension of this specific type of career indecision. Intervention with indecisive individuals is also addressed. Finally, some lines of research about indecisiveness are suggested.
... Experiencing difficulty when making a decision or having regret about a choice made is a fairly common human experience. Despite its common occurrence and its potential impact on people's lives, however, basic research on the nature of indecisiveness is still fairly limited (Rassin, 2007). The present research aims at increasing our understanding of the phenomenon of indecisiveness by providing explanations for cultural variations in indecisive tendency and simultaneously shedding light on the basic processes underlying indecision. ...
Previous research suggests that individuals of East Asian (vs. European) cultural backgrounds are more indecisive, and this cultural difference is related to naïve dialecticism, a lay belief system that tolerates contradictory information. The present research extends this line of work by examining a proximal mediating mechanism underlying the relationship between naïve dialecticism and indecisiveness as well as a negative consequence of chronic indecisiveness induced by naïve dialecticism. Results indicated that East Asian (vs. European) Canadian participants were more indecisive in a real educational decision (Study 1) and exhibited lower life satisfaction, which was mediated serially by naïve dialecticism through chronic indecisiveness (Study 2). In Study 3, European Canadian participants who were primed with a dialectical mind-set were more indecisive in a consumer choice task, relative to those not primed, and this effect was mediated by evaluative ambivalence toward the chosen alternative.
... People who are high on Indecisiveness tend to worry more about making mistakes, and have lower perceptions of self-efficacy with regard to making sound decisions (Frost and Shows 1993;Rassin et al. 2007). They also tend to show a desire to seek out more information, however any additional information obtained appears to be used by these individuals to confirm that they are making the right choice, rather than contributing to the decision itself (Ferrari and Dovidio 2000;Rassin 2007;Reed 1985). The decision delay might thus be the result of high Indecisiveness. ...
In the event of a wildfire, Australian residents of wildfire-prone areas have a choice to defend their home or evacuate early. However, rather than deciding on and preparing for one of these fire-responses ahead of time, most residents delay deciding on defending v. evacuating (e.g. they wait and see instead). Recent research has shown that delaying this decision is associated with reduced levels of preparedness for both responses and on the day of a fire, an increased risk to life and property. The current study empirically examined what predicts this decision delay regarding one’s fire-response by measuring two personality traits and several decision-related factors. A longitudinal survey study of residents of multiple wildfire-prone areas in Western Australia showed that the strongest predictor of delaying their decision to defend v. evacuate was a lack of difference in perceived values of defending v. evacuating. These findings have important implications for the design of interventions to reduce the risks associated with such delay. For one, agencies could utilise residents’ value base to reduce decision delay. Alternatively, they could focus on the formation of proper contingency plans and stress the necessity to prepare well for both defending and evacuating.
... Furthermore, to concretely measure levels of decisiveness, we used a behavioral task where participants were asked to select the best option from a list of choices. We focused on response time for this study, as time required to make decisions helps to understand important dimensions of indecisiveness, showing decision delays as well as avoidance of decisions (Rassin, 2007). We hypothesized that participants that were dialectically primed would spend a longer time on the task compared to those who were non-dialectically primed. ...
Previous findings in cultural psychology suggest that East Asians are more likely than North Americans to view the world dialectically and that this dialectic view of the world affects their psychological tendencies. Extending these findings, our research examined the relationship between dialecticism and indecisiveness in European Canadians and Hong Kong Chinese. Evidence from three studies demonstrated that: Hong Kong Chinese were more indecisive than European Canadians and that dialecticism mediated this cultural difference (Study 1), dialectically primed individuals were more likely than non-dialectically primed individuals to experience indecisiveness (Study 2), and decisions’ importance affected cultural variations: no cultural difference in indecisiveness was found for important decisions, with Hong Kong Chinese reporting a higher level of indecisiveness for less important decisions compared to European Canadians. Furthermore, the cultural variation for less important decisions was mediated by dialecticism (Study 3). The importance of studying decision making processes across cultures is discussed.
... In sum, the present work furthers an understanding of the nature of indecisiveness and the situations in which perceptions and behaviors associated with indecisiveness are-and are not-likely to emerge. The study offers evidence, first, that indecisiveness-related differences in perceptions and process behaviors at the individual level do not emerge in group decisions; second, that indecisiveness-related differences in confidence are not necessarily a direct function of process differences, an important insight for the development of models of indecisiveness (see Rassin, 2007); and third, that indecisive individuals might be aided in their decision making through activities that foster decision-related social interaction. Indecisiveness is one of very many factors now known to contribute to the subjective experience of decisional confidence (see, e.g., Russo & Schoemaker, 1992). ...
Indecisiveness is an individual difference measure of chronic difficulty and delay in decision making. Indecisiveness is associated with low decisional confidence and distinct patterns of pre-choice information search behavior. The present study explored whether the confidence levels and search behaviors associated with individual indecisiveness also emerge in group decision making contexts. In this study, 97 decisive and indecisive participants were assigned to make a decision individually or in a homogenous three-person group. Indecisiveness score was found to predict participant decisional confidence in the individual condition but not in the group condition, with group participants being overall more confident than individuals. Similar results were obtained for other related measures of participants' perceptions of the decision task. Surprisingly, no indecisiveness-related differences in information search were found, suggesting that other aspects of the group process contribute to increased confidence. The results provide initial evidence that indecisiveness does not influence group decision making and that, especially for indecisive individuals, working in groups may be a way to boost decisional confidence.
Demographic changes and a predicted shortage of nursing staff are progressively putting pressure on the healthcare system. Care robots may represent one part of a possible solution to this problem as they can assist care work. However, large parts of the population are reportedly skeptical about robotics in care, and field studies are difficult to conduct due to the low prevalence of real robotics in the field. Therefore, we follow an experimental approach pertaining to the question of individual decision-making. In this regard, we analyze the aspects that influence the individual’s choice between a care robot and a human caregiver for assistance in their daily life. Our economic experiment is conducted in a virtual laboratory to examine specifically how quality uncertainty of care affects individual’s decisions for and against robotic care. In the experiment, 162 participants fully completed the experiment in which they were asked to repeatedly choose between a human caregiver and a care robot. Our results reveal that, overall, the care robot is chosen more often than a human caregiver. At the same time, the quality uncertainty of care linked to a human caregiver barely affected the choice of participants. On the other hand, a participant’s health status and their attitude toward direct interactions with care robots did partially affect their choice. Additionally, we explored causes for indecisiveness and its effect on the choice. Here, we found indecisive participants tending to choose a human caregiver more often.
Noticing that people may become more hesitant about their airport choice when exposed to abundant information and multi-channel on-line sales opportunities, this paper analyzes hesitancy in the choice of transfer airport in a multi-airport region using three approaches: a multinomial logit model, a random forests algorithm, and deep reinforcement learning. These methods are applied to the outcomes of a stated choice experiment, which was designed to survey the iterative airport choice process under hesitancy. The results indicate that a quarter of the passengers show evidence of hesitancy. Further, the deep reinforcement learning approach is found to provide the highest accuracy in representing the stated choices; the random forests algorithm also gives good results in capturing the reconsideration decision, while the multinomial logit model seems less accurate in representing the choice behavior of interest. Moreover, hesitancy involved a switch from flight-related attributes to ground transport-related attributes. Managerial implications for airlines and airports are discussed.
Our research is concerned with how and why vicious circles of decision occur in hybrid partnerships. The literature reports three types of decision dysfunctions that can alter the trajectory of multi-stakeholder collaborations: escalation of commitment, procrastination and indecision. While previous studies focused on one dysfunction at a time, we inquire about cases in which dysfunctions coexist and interact in the same partnership. Employing multiple sources of qualitative data, we conducted a longitudinal field study in a cross-sector partnership that co-created and managed a science park. We offer an in-depth account of ‘vicious circles of decision’ in which partners’ attempts to solve a dysfunction paradoxically led to the accumulation of additional dysfunctions. We explain that the process is more likely to happen when solutions are (1) conditioned by the very risk–opportunity tensions they try to solve and (2) inscribed in material artefacts for greater visibility. As well as augmenting the literature on hybrid partnerships, we contribute to the debate in organization studies about the evolution of collaborations within frames of concurrent risk–opportunity tensions and theorize about the role of materiality in such processes.
Celem artykułu jest ukazanie współzależności między kontekstem życia i rozwoju jednostki a strukturą tożsamości. Współzależność ta odnosi się do wzajemnego wpływu, jaki wywierają na siebie wybory w zakresie środowiskowych kontekstów życia i wybory w zakresie oczekiwanej struktury Ja. To, że otoczenie, w jakim jednostka żyje oddziałuje na nią oznacza, że z jednej strony środowisko życia może umożliwiać rozwój tożsamości jednostki w kierunku przez nią oczekiwanym i wymarzonym, a z drugiej strony może ów rozwój utrudniać a nawet uniemożliwiać. Pod wpływem nacisków w postaci zachęt i ograniczeń płynących z otoczenia jednostka dokonuje wyborów środowiska dla krystalizacji swojego stylu życia oraz jego bezpośredniego efektu w postaci określonej struktury Ja. Tak więc, celem artykułu jest ukazanie, na przykładzie młodych Polaków, sposobów dokonywania wyboru celów życiowych i wizji życia między przystosowaniem Ja do realiów życia tu i teraz, a projektowaniem Ja do realiów życia migracyjnego. W artykule ukazywane są zarówno korzyści, jak i zagrożenia stałości kontekstu życia oraz przemieszczeń przestrzennych dla struktury Ja.
This longitudinal study investigated ambivalence during and after the decision in favor of a field of study or apprenticeship in 220 German high school graduates. In addition, participants underwent measurements of career decision-making self-efficacy, neuroticism, conscientiousness, current satisfaction with life as well as satisfaction with the chosen training. On average, we found low to moderate levels of ambivalence during and after career decision making. Analyses showed that ambivalence in career decision making is negatively linked to both current satisfaction with life and satisfaction with the chosen training. Furthermore, the finding of significant predictors of ambivalence during and after career decision making revealed a useful basic approach for further career-choice research as well as suggestions for the development of prevention and intervention programs for ambivalent persons.
Previous research has indicated that indecisiveness is associated with informational tunnel vision, in that individuals scoring high on a measure of indecisiveness tend to gather more information about the alternative they ultimately choose, while largely neglecting other options. In the first study, a decision making paradigm was employed in which participants had to choose a college course from a set of five options. Findings confirmed that the score on a measure of indecisiveness correlated positively with the amount of information gathered concerning the ultimately chosen course, but not with the gathered information pertaining to non-chosen courses. In the second study, choice difficulty was manipulated by varying the distinctiveness of the courses. Again, indecisiveness seemed to be associated with tunnel vision, regardless of choice difficulty. Hence, the findings support the notion that indecisiveness limits people’s information gathering. It is proposed that this type of tunnel vision serves as a defence against a natural tendency to gather as much information as possible.
This study investigated the relationship of indecisiveness with the Big Five personality factors and the specificity of indecisiveness compared to the Big Five factors in the prediction of decisional problems. A sample of 543 adolescents was followed between the beginning and the end of Grade 12. Neuroticism turned out to be the strongest correlate of indecisiveness. Using cluster analysis on the Big Five factors three clusters were identified which resembled the overcontrolled, undercontrolled, and resilient clusters from previous research. The resilient cluster showed the lowest scores whereas the overcontrolled cluster showed the highest scores on indecisiveness. Finally, the effect of indecisiveness on decisional tasks remained significant after controlling for the Big Five factors, providing evidence for the specificity of indecisiveness.
Purpose
Indecision is not the hallmark of a great manager, but what do we know about when and why managers avoid or postpone decisions? The purpose of this paper is to discuss the limited research on indecision.
Design/methodology/approach
This article reviews research from judgment and decision making, psychology, management, and marketing literatures to assemble what we already know about indecision. The review spans situational and personal determinants of indecision, highlighting what we know about when and why people experience indecision as well as who is predictably indecisive.
Findings
Decisions are avoided when people are asked to justify them, when options are similar in attractiveness, and when there are a large number of options to consider. Indecision may sometimes be a result of systematic biases (i.e. omission bias and status quo bias), and indecisive people may be more prone to confirmation bias. Finally, indecisiveness is related to numerous other individual differences, many of which are negative.
Practical implications
Specific recommendations for managers include evaluating options separately rather than comparing options, structuring incentive systems to reward decisive action, and explicitly considering the risk of lost opportunity when deciding whether to put off making a decision.
Originality/value
The literature reviewed in this paper spans diverse disciplines and perspectives. This paper provides a starting point for managers and researchers interested in understanding indecision: when and why it occurs, who is likely to be most indecisive, and what we might do to counter indecision.
Indecisiveness is a trait-related general tendency to experience decision difficulties across a variety of situations, leading to decision delay, worry, and regret. Indecisiveness is proposed (Rassin, 2007) to be associated with an increase in desire for information acquisition and reliance on compensatory strategies—as evidenced by alternative-based information search—during decision making. However existing studies provide conflicting findings. We conducted an information board study of indecisiveness, using eye tracking methodology, to test the hypotheses that the relationship between indecisiveness and choice strategy depends on being in the early stage of the decision making process, and that it depends on being in the presence of an opportunity to delay choice. We found strong evidence for the first hypothesis in that indecisive individuals changed shift behavior from the first to the second half of the task, consistent with a move from greater to lesser compensatory processing, while the shift behavior of decisive individuals suggested lesser compensatory processing over the whole task. Indecisiveness was also related to time spent viewing attributes of the selected course, and to time spent looking away from decision information. These findings resolve past discrepancies, suggest an interesting account of how the decision process unfolds for indecisive versus decisive individuals, and contribute to a better understanding of this tendency. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This study investigated the specificity of indecisiveness compared to trait anxiety. In addition, the predictive validity of indecisiveness for postdecisional problems with regard to choosing a major was examined. A sample of 539 adolescents participated at the beginning of Grade 12 and was followed until the first year in higher education. Factor analyses showed evidence for a differentiation between indecisiveness and trait anxiety. In addition, indecisiveness at the beginning of Grade 12 predicted less commitment to the choice of a major in higher education, which, in turn, predicted less choice stability. The effect of indecisiveness on these postdecisional problems remained significant after controlling for trait anxiety, providing further evidence for the specificity of indecisiveness. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
The aim of this dissertation was to explain why some people are indecisive, in the broadest sense of the term. First, a behavioral definition of indecisiveness was synthesized from the range of conceptions of indecision and indecisiveness found across different literatures. Indecisive behaviors were derived from the synthesized definition and used to develop a multi-dimensional, behavioral self-report scale. The scale was designed to capture the breadth of indecisive behaviors, without a priori attributing to them any causes. In three studies, the scale was developed, refined, validated, and used to test distinct mechanisms underlying indecisiveness.
In Study 1 (N = 369), the initial scale was developed. Four types of indecisiveness were hypothesized to exist at distinct phases in the decision-making process: 1) before commitment, 2) before enacting the commitment, 3) before completing the commitment, and 4) after fulfilling the commitment. Analysis suggested that indecisiveness was multidimensional, but consisted of: 1) decision evasion, 2) prolonged latency, 3) waiting, and 4) changing commitments.
Indecisiveness was conceptually refined and reconceived as manifesting itself in three core behaviors: 1) prolonged latency, 2) not-deciding, and 3) changing decisions. The scale was refined accordingly, and other behaviors associated with indecisiveness, such as decision evasion and waiting, were considered to be proximal behavioral contributors.
In Study 2 (N = 169), the multi-dimensionality and multi-determination of the refined indecisiveness scale were confirmed. The core indecisiveness behaviors were predicted by specific patterns of proximal behavioral contributors and four of the Big Five personality traits. The refined scale’s validity was established using two other measures of indecisiveness, information processing style, and a double-disjunct task.
In Study 3 (N = 390), the scale was further refined and administered to a demographically broader sample. The multi-dimensionality and multi-determination of indecisiveness were again supported. Nine facets of the HEXACO (Ashton & Lee, 2007) model of personality contributed to indecisiveness through seven mechanisms: 1) worry, 2) low self-confidence, 3) dependence, 4) high standards, 5) escapist impulsivity, 6) careless impulsivity, and 7) concern for others. The scale’s validity was further established using peer report, a status quo bias task, and an optimistic bias task.
Confirmation bias, as the term is typically used in the psychological literature, connotes the seeking or interpreting of evidence in ways that are partial to existing beliefs, expectations, or a hypothesis in hand. The author reviews evidence of such a bias in a variety of guises and gives examples of its operation in several practical contexts. Possible explanations are considered, and the question of its utility or disutility is discussed.
Confirmation bias, as the term is typically used in the psychological literature, connotes the seeking or interpreting of evidence in ways that are partial to existing beliefs, expectations, or a hypothesis in hand. The author reviews evidence of such a bias in a variety of guises and gives examples of its operation in several practical contexts. Possible explanations are considered, and the question of its utility or disutility is discussed. When men wish to construct or support a theory, how they torture facts into their service! (Mackay, 1852/ 1932, p. 552) Confirmation bias is perhaps the best known and most widely accepted notion of inferential error to come out of the literature on human reasoning. (Evans, 1989, p. 41) If one were to attempt to identify a single problematic aspect of human reasoning that deserves attention above all others, the confirma- tion bias would have to be among the candidates for consideration. Many have written about this bias, and it appears to be sufficiently strong and pervasive that one is led to wonder whether the bias, by itself, might account for a significant fraction of the disputes, altercations, and misun- derstandings that occur among individuals, groups, and nations.
A scale for indecisiveness was constructed and then used to investigate distinctive features of indecisiveness. Students of the 6th (and last) year in 2 high schools participated in the questionnaire. In the literature on decision making, the distinction between indecision and indecisiveness is an important issue, but evidence showing that these 2 constructs are different is lacking. The authors found clear evidence for such a distinction, from a joint exploratory factor analysis of the indecisiveness scale and a career indecision scale, and from the differential relation of both with self-esteem as a 3rd variable. Furthermore, with confirmatory factor analysis, the authors found that the correlations between items on career indecision cannot be explained only by indecisiveness, and that also a factor specific to the situation of career decision is needed. These results corroborate the distinction between career indecision and indecisiveness. Although it must be differentiated from specific types of indecision, such as career indecision, indecisiveness turned out to be a correlate of the specific indecisions--one that can explain the intercorrelations between different kinds of more specific indecision. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The present study examined 240 mall shoppers' procrastination scores (on arousal and avoidance measures), the closeness of the measurement to Christmas, and shoppers' rationales for why they were shopping at that particular time. Inventory scores were higher among shoppers on Christmas eve than 5 weeks earlier, and correlated positively with length of time to redeem mall gift certificates issued for participation. Further, people who scored high compared to low on the measures of procrastination cited different reasons for their shopping times, across measures. Procrastinators motivated by arousal from working against a deadline attributed their lack of diligence to job-related attributes (e.g. work, business commitments) that compelled them to begin shopping at the last possible opportunity. Procrastinators motivated to avoid situations involving threats to self-esteem attributed their postponed shopping to personal attributes (e.g. lack of energy, indecisiveness, perceived task aversiveness) reflecting their belief about their own inabilities. Results suggest that some procrastinators use situational attributes while others claim personal shortcomings for waiting to complete a “real-world” task at or before deadline.
This research examined the behavioral processes by which individual differences in indecision may be reflected in decision-making situations. In Experiment 1, using an information board paradigm, indecisives compared to decisives searched less information and shifted less often among dimensions under a high cognitive load (distracter) condition. In Experiment 2, compared to decisives, indecisives demonstrated more intra- and fewer inter-dimensional shifts while searching the information board under a high cognitive load condition, thereby focusing their search. Indecisives also reported lower self-confidence and greater anxiety in the high cognitive load condition. These studies demonstrate that indecision-prone individuals tend to use a technique adapted as an avoidance strategy.
This meta-analysis contains the correlations of 121 studies examining the relation between procrastination and personality variables, motives, affect, and performance. The largest negative effect sizes were found in relation to conscientiousness and self-efficacy, and the largest positive relation was found with self-handicapping. Affect was moderately related, as well as performance outcomes, and motives were weakly correlated. Many of the effect size categories were heterogeneous, indicating that moderators may play a role. However, the majority of studies did not account for moderators. It is argued that this is a serious shortcoming and that a different type of research is needed to study procrastination in a meaningful way.
Indecisiveness can pose a threat to normal daily functioning. In addition, it has been associated with obsessive–compulsive disorder. Undergraduate students (N = 135) completed the Indecisiveness Scale (Frost & Shows, 1993) and three other measures. It was found that women are more indecisive than men. Furthermore, indecisiveness correlated positively with several obsessive–compulsive complaints (e.g., checking and rumination), but negatively with life satisfaction. Finally, indecisiveness was associated with the number of do-not-know answers on a scale containing political statements that had to be evaluated by participants. The latter finding suggests that indecisive individuals not only need more time to reach a decision, but that they also actually fail to reach decisions.
This article investigates the effect of time pressure on choice deferral. Recent research suggests that the likelihood of deferral is contingent on the ease of making the selection decision (which option to choose) as well as the overall attractiveness of the selected alternative. We focus on how time pressure systematically impacts choice deferral by increasing the use of noncompensatory decision rules in the selection decision and by increasing the relative emphasis placed on the unique features in the deferral decision (whether to choose). Consistent with the hypotheses, we find over a series of five studies that time pressure (1) decreases choice deferral when choice involves high conflict but not when conflict is low, (2) reduces the impact of shared features on choice deferral, and (3) decreases choice deferral for sets with common bad and unique good features (approach-approach conflict) but not for sets with common good and unique bad features (avoidance-avoidance conflict). We further show that greater attention to the unique features is not a general property of decision making under time pressure but rather a consequence of the primacy of the selection decision over the deferral decision. Consistent with this premise, time pressure did not decrease the relative attention paid to common features when the task was described as purely a deferral decision. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
Current psychological theory and research affirm the positive affective and motivational consequences of having personal choice. These findings have led to the popular notion that the more choice, the better-that the human ability to manage, and the human desire for, choice is unlimited. Findings from 3 experimental studies starkly challenge this implicit assumption that having more choices is necessarily more intrinsically motivating than having fewer. These experiments, which were conducted in both field and laboratory settings, show that people are more likely to purchase gourmet jams or chocolates or to undertake optional class essay assignments when offered a limited array of 6 choices rather than a more extensive array of 24 or 30 choices. Moreover, participants actually reported greater subsequent satisfaction with their selections and wrote better essays when their original set of options had been limited. Implications for future research are discussed.
Can people feel worse off as the options they face increase? The present studies suggest that some people--maximizers--can. Study 1 reported a Maximization Scale, which measures individual differences in desire to maximize. Seven samples revealed negative correlations between maximization and happiness, optimism, self-esteem, and life satisfaction, and positive correlations between maximization and depression, perfectionism, and regret. Study 2 found maximizers less satisfied than nonmaximizers (satisficers) with consumer decisions, and more likely to engage in social comparison. Study 3 found maximizers more adversely affected by upward social comparison. Study 4 found maximizers more sensitive to regret and less satisfied in an ultimatum bargaining game. The interaction between maximizing and choice is discussed in terms of regret, adaptation, and self-blame.
Several independent lines of research bear on the question of why individuals avoid decisions by postponing them, failing to act, or accepting the status quo. This review relates findings across several different disciplines and uncovers 4 decision avoidance effects that offer insight into this common but troubling behavior: choice deferral, status quo bias, omission bias, and inaction inertia. These findings are related by common antecedents and consequences in a rational-emotional model of the factors that predispose humans to do nothing. Prominent components of the model include cost-benefit calculations, anticipated regret, and selection difficulty. Other factors affecting decision avoidance through these key components, such as anticipatory negative emotions, decision strategies, counterfactual thinking, and preference uncertainty, are also discussed.
Which domains in life produce the greatest potential for regret, and what features of those life domains explain why? Using archival and laboratory evidence, the authors show that greater perceived opportunity within life domains evokes more intense regret. This pattern is consistent with previous publications demonstrating greater regret stemming from high rather than low opportunity or choice. A meta-analysis of 11 regret ranking studies revealed that the top six biggest regrets in life center on (in descending order) education, career, romance, parenting, the self, and leisure. Study Set 2 provided new laboratory evidence that directly linked the regret ranking to perceived opportunity. Study Set 3 ruled out an alternative interpretation involving framing effects. Overall, these findings show that people's biggest regrets are a reflection of where in life they see their largest opportunities; that is, where they see tangible prospects for change, growth, and renewal.
Several independent lines of research bear on the question of why individuals avoid decisions by postponing them, failing to act, or accepting the status quo. This review relates findings across several different disciplines and uncovers 4 decision avoidance effects that offer insight into this common but troubling behavior: choice deferral, status quo bias, omission bias, and inaction inertia. These findings are related by common antecedents and consequences in a rational-emotional model of the factors that predispose humans to do nothing. Prominent components of the model include cost-benefit calculations, anticipated regret, and selection difficulty. Other factors affecting decision avoidance through these key components, such as anticipatory negative emotions, decision strategies, counterfactual thinking, and preference uncertainty, are also discussed.
This volume, a sequel to The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions and Testimony which is widely acclaimed by both scientists and practitioners, brings the field completely up-to-date and focuses in particular on aspects of vulnerability, confabulation and false confessions. The is an unrivalled integration of scientific knowledge of the psychological processes and research relating to interrogation, with the practical investigative and legal issues that bear upon obtaining, and using in court, evidence from interrogations of suspects. Accessible style which will appeal to academics, students and practitioners. Authoritative integration of theory, research, practical implications and vivid case illustration. Coverage of topical issues like confabulation, false memory, and false confessions. Part of the Wiley Series in The Psychology of Crime, Policing and Law.
The present research examined the behavioral processes by which individual differences in decisional procrastination are reflected in decision-making style. It was hypothesized, on the basis of previous research suggesting that people higher in decisional procrastination have a higher threshold for certainty before making a decision, that participants higher in decisional procrastination would not only take longer to complete the task, but also would seek more information about an alternative eventually chosen before making a decision. Participants, who had previously completed a decisional procrastination scale, were instructed within a behavioral process paradigm to search information about alternative choices on a decision-making task involving the selection of college courses. The number of dimensions (four vs six) and number of alternatives (two vs five) were systematically varied. The results provided convergent evidence with descriptive studies suggesting that rather than being unsystematic and easily distracted in their information searches, people higher in decisional procrastination are systematic and strategic but search for more information specifically about chosen alternatives. Theoretical and practical implications are considered.
Choice often produces conflict. This notion, however, plays no role in classical decision theory, in which each alternative is assigned a value, and the decision maker selects from every choice set the option with the highest value. We contrast this principle of value maximization with the hypothesis that the option to delay choice or seek new alternatives is more likely to be selected when conflict is high than when it is low. This hypothesis is supported by several studies showing that the tendency to defer decision, search for new alternatives, or choose the default option can be increased when the offered set is enlarged or improved, contrary to the principle of value maximization.
Newly constructed scales of decisional procrastination were validated as a precondition for assessing similarities and differences between decisional and task avoidant procrastination. The two behavioral dispositions and their concomitant affective reactions (tension during decision making and discomfort about postponing tasks, respectively) were found to be independent. Each disposition was general rather than specific with a high inter-correlation of indecisiveness on matters of minor as well as major importance and a high inter-correlation of postponing life routines as well as postponing academic assignments. Two of the five CostaMcCrae personality factors accounted for most of the explained variance in the two kinds of procrastination, Neuroticism for decisional procrastination and Conscientiousness for task avoidance procrastination, respectively. These findings were consistent with theoretical formulations by Lazarus (AppraisalAnxietyAvoidance Model) and Kuhl (Action Control Theory). Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
The Gudjonsson Suggestibility ScalesSuggestibility And Hypnotic SusceptibilityComplianceAcquiescenceCorrelations Between Suggestibility, Compliance And AcquiescenceSuggestibility and GenderSuggestibility and Ethnic Background
Suggestibility and AgeSuggestibility and IntelligenceSuggestibility and MemorySuggestibility and AnxietySuggestibility and ImpulsivitySuggestibility and the Mmpi-2Suggestibility and Sleep DeprivationSuggestibility: Dissociation And Fantasy PronenessSuggestibility and Instructional ManipulationSuggestibility and the Experimenter EffectSuggestibility and Social DesirabilitySuggestibility and Coping StrategiesSuggestibility and AssertivenessSuggestibility and Self-EsteemSuggestibility and Locus Of ControlSuggestibility and Field DependenceSuspiciousness and AngerSuggestibility and Test SettingSuggestibility and Previous ConvictionsPolice Interviewing and SuggestibilityResisters and Alleged False ConfessorsSuggestibility and False ConfessionsSuggestibility and Eyewitness TestimonySuggestibility and Recovered MemoryConclusions
Research suggests that intolerance of uncertainty is a cognitive process involved in excessive worry and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Although previous studies indicate that intolerance of uncertainty and excessive worry are highly and specifically related, the question of how intolerance of uncertainty might lead to worry has yet to be empirically examined. This paper presents two studies investigating intolerance of uncertainty and information processing. Study 1 used an incidental learning task to examine the relationship between intolerance of uncertainty and the recall of stimuli denoting uncertainty. The results showed that participants high in intolerance of uncertainty, relative to those low in intolerance of uncertainty, recalled a higher proportion of words denoting uncertainty. Study 2 investigated whether intolerance of uncertainty would be associated with threatening interpretations of ambiguous information. The results showed that participants high in intolerance of uncertainty reported more concern about ambiguous situations than did participants with low levels of intolerance of uncertainty. In addition, the tendency to make threatening interpretations of ambiguous situations was more highly related to intolerance of uncertainty than to worry, anxiety, or depression. Taken together, these findings suggest that intolerance of uncertainty is associated with information processing biases that may be involved in the etiology of excessive worry and GAD.
Perfectionism is a major diagnostic criterion for one DSM-III diagnosis, and it has been hypothesized to play a major role in a wide variety of psychopathologies. Yet there is no precise definition of, and there is a paucity of research on, this construct. Based on what has been theorized about perfectionism, a multidimensional measure was developed and several hypotheses regarding the nature of perfectionism were tested in four separate studies. The major dimension of this measure was excessive concern over making mistakes. Five other dimensions were identified, including high personal standards, the perception of high parental expectations, the perception of high parental criticism, the doubting of the quality of one's actions, and a preference for order and organization. Perfectionism and certain of its subscales were correlated with a wide variety of psychopathological symptoms. There was also an association between perfectionism and procrastination. Several subscales of the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS), personal standards and organization, were associated with positive achievement striving and work habits. The MPS was highly correlated with one of the existing measures of perfectionism. Two other existing measures were only moderately correlated with the MPS and with each other. Future studies of perfectionism should take into account the multidimensional nature of the construct.
Although indecisiveness seems to be a widespread problem, little empirical research has addressed its measurement. Frost and
Shows (1993; Behaviour Research and Therapy, 31, 683–692) introduced the Indecisiveness Scale (IS) as a measure of individual differences in general indecisiveness. Although
these authors conducted various psychometric analyses, some properties (e.g., factor structure, test-retest reliability) were
not investigated. In the present studies, several reliability and validity indices were computed. First, four of the fifteen
items of the IS were found to be omissible. Second, 4-week test-retest reliability was found to be satisfactory. Third, scores
on the IS were found to correlate meaningfully with a concurrent measure of decision making, and with various scales of psychopathology.
Lastly, in Study 4, the IS was found to predict scores on a behavioural measure of decision making, suggesting good predictive
validity. Overall, these findings suggest that the IS has good psychometric properties.
This series of three studies investigated some of the characteristics of worrying which are independent of related constructs such as trait anxiety. The results from all three studies suggested that worry and anxiety can be considered as separate constructs, each with their own unique sources of variance. Worrying was associated with adaptive problem-focussed coping strategies and an information-seeking cognitive style. Trait anxiety was independently associated with psychological processes that are normally considered to result in poor psychological outcomes, including (i) poor problem-solving confidence, (ii) poor perceived personal control, (iii) responsibility for negative but not positive outcomes, (iv) the tendency to define events as threats and (v) avoidance or emotion-focused coping strategies. The results also suggested ways in which pathological worrying might be generated, especially where adaptive worrying is thwarted or where processes characteristic of adaptive worrying interact with psychological phenomena associated with high levels of anxiety.
Indecisiveness is an often mentioned symptom of obsessive compulsive disorder and obsessive compulsive personality disorder, yet very little research has been done examining its nature and measurement. Three studies are presented here which examine the nature of compulsive indecisiveness using a newly developed scale. In study 1 the Indecisiveness Scale was correlated with measures of obsessionality and compulsive checking among normal Ss. It was also correlated with the maladaptive evaluative concern dimensions of perfectionism and with compulsive hoarding. In study 2 indecisive Ss (as measured by the Indecisiveness Scale) were found to score higher on measures of procrastination and general psychopathology. In addition, they reported problems in making decisions in a variety of life domains (social, academic, family and everyday). In study 3 Ss who scored high on the Indecisiveness Scale were found to have longer latencies on an experimental decision-making task. The implications of these findings for the nature of indecisiveness were discussed.
Three factors of indecision are derived from decision theory: being insufficiently informed about the alternatives, valuation problems, and uncertainty about the outcomes. The three factors are studied in high school students’ career decision process of choosing further studies. Using factor analysis, we found empirical evidence for a differentiation between the three theoretical sources of career indecision: an information factor, a valuation factor, and an outcomes factor, but only the valuation factor and the outcomes factor seem to associate empirically with career indecision. The importance of both factors for career indecision was further supported by their intermediate role between general indecisiveness and career indecision.
Indecisiveness is the inability to make decisions in a timely manner across situations and domains. The present research explores the construct of indecisiveness across sex and culture, given the past suggestion of group differences in mean scores (
[23] and [31]). Frost and Shows’ (1993) Indecisiveness Scale was administered to undergraduates in the United States and China (73 men and 88 women per culture). For Americans, a two-factor model of indecisiveness (general indecisiveness and planning indecisiveness) emerged while, for Chinese, a three-factor model (with general indecisiveness split into anxiety- and confidence-related factors) better explained the data. No group differences in mean indecisiveness scores were found, but differences did exist on some factors. The results suggest caution in using the scale cross-culturally, but also point to interesting cultural variations in the nature of indecisiveness.
Indecisiveness has been argued to be associated with process characteristics of decision making, such as decision latency, required amount of information, and reluctance to decide. In this study, the possible effect of indecisiveness on the content of decisions was explored. Fifty female undergraduate students completed a scale measuring indecisiveness and subsequently evaluated various situation descriptions either as concerning or not concerning. Scores on the Indecisiveness Scale correlated with the number of ambiguous situations that were labeled as concerning. This association was maintained after controlling for anxiety, depression, worry-proneness, and intolerance of uncertainty. Apparently, indecisiveness fosters worst case scenario reasoning, in that indecisive individuals tend to interpret ambiguous situations more readily as threatening.
We review implications for career decision making (CDM) that might be drawn from recent studies of human information processing and decision making. Normative decision theory, the theory of how one ought to make choices, may be regarded as an idealized view of rationality towards which a person might strive. Descriptive studies, however, show how limited is the rationality of people's behavior when they are left to their own devices. Techniques of decision analysis have been developed for helping people to make better decisions. These methods might be of value to CDM, both in supplementing traditional guidance procedures, and in defining criteria used to evaluate CDM. However, decision analysis does have shortcomings, and there are problems that may arise when applying decision analysis to CDM. These problems are discussed and evaluated.
This paper investigated the relationship between the total number of Cant Decide(CD) scores on an extensive (440 item), computer administered personality test (EysenckPersonality Profiler; EPP) and the personality trait scores from that test. Across a diverse rangeof occupational groups, the CD score was moderately, positively correlated with Neuroticism (r = 0.24, P < 0.001) but the size of the correlation varied substantiallyaccording to the occupational group of the test-takers. Moderated regression analysis indicatedthat the average psychoticism score of the group interacted with CDs to predict an individualsneuroticism. This relationship shows how the tough-mindedness of the occupational culture, asdefined by the scores of peers, moderates neuroticism of the participants. The results underpinthe importance of looking at test-taking styles and how they interact with the environment. Thisquasi-experimental study represents a new approach to investigating neuroticism, whilst avoidingthe ethical issues of conducting actual experimental studies.
This paper explores a judgmental heuristic in which a person evaluates the frequency of classes or the probability of events by availability, i.e., by the ease with which relevant instances come to mind. In general, availability is correlated with ecological frequency, but it is also affected by other factors. Consequently, the reliance on the availability heuristic leads to systematic biases. Such biases are demonstrated in the judged frequency of classes of words, of combinatorial outcomes, and of repeated events. The phenomenon of illusory correlation is explained as an availability bias. The effects of the availability of incidents and scenarios on subjective probability are discussed.
A simple questionnaire was developed as an instrument for assessing the existence and extent of different obsessional-compulsive complaints. Two major types of complaint, checking and washing compulsions, and two minor types, slowness and doubting, were established. The final form of the questionnaire, and major properties, are presented.
The present report describes the development of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire to measure the trait of worry. The 16-item instrument emerged from factor analysis of a large number of items and was found to possess high internal consistency and good test-retest reliability. The questionnaire correlates predictably with several psychological measures reasonably related to worry, and does not correlate with other measures more remote to the construct. Responses to the questionnaire are not influenced by social desirability. The measure was found to significantly discriminate college samples (a) who met all, some, or none of the DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder and (b) who met criteria for GAD vs posttraumatic stress disorder. Among 34 GAD-diagnosed clinical subjects, the worry questionnaire was found not to correlate with other measures of anxiety or depression, indicating that it is tapping an independent construct with severely anxious individuals, and coping desensitization plus cognitive therapy was found to produce significantly greater reductions in the measure than did a nondirective therapy condition.
The purpose of the present study was to determine whether compulsive checking was associated with greater checking behavior and slower performance in a personally relevant and potentially threatening task. Students in an abnormal psychology class completed the Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory and the Everyday Checking Behavior Scale early in the semester. One month later during the first examination they were asked to record the number of times they went over (checked) each exam question after first answering it. The amount of time taken by subjects to complete this and the final exam was also recorded. The MOCI-check subscale and ECBS were correlated with the number of answer checks. MOCI-check scores were also correlated with the time taken to complete each exam. It was suggested that the characteristic of indecisiveness may be responsible for these relationships.
The Padua Inventory (PI) consists of 60 items describing common obsessional and compulsive behavior and allows investigation of the topography of such problems in normal and clinical Ss. It was administered to 967 normal Italian Ss, ranging in age from 16 to 70 yr. Inventory consistency and 1-month reliability were satisfactory. Females reported more complaints, more intensely than males. Ss aged from 16 to 20 yr and Ss aged from 46 to 70 complain of more obsessions and compulsions than Ss of intermediate ages. Four factors were identified: impaired control of mental activities, becoming contaminated, checking behaviors, urges and worries of losing control over motor behaviors. The PI correlates with the Maudsley Obsessional-Compulsive Questionnaire (0.70), Leyton Obsessional-Compulsive Inventory (0.71 with Symptom and 0.66 with Trait scales) and Self-rating Obsessional Scale (0.61). Furthermore, it allows discrimination between a group of 75 outpatients with obsessive-compulsive disorders and a similar group of outpatients with other neurotic disorders. Relationships with fears and neuroticism traits were also found, reflected in moderately high correlations with the Fear Survey Schedule and the Neuroticism scale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire.
The psychological principles that govern the perception of decision problems and the evaluation of probabilities and outcomes
produce predictable shifts of preference when the same problem is framed in different ways. Reversals of preference are demonstrated
in choices regarding monetary outcomes, both hypothetical and real, and in questions pertaining to the loss of human lives.
The effects of frames on preferences are compared to the effects of perspectives on perceptual appearance. The dependence
of preferences on the formulation of decision problems is a significant concern for the theory of rational choice.