ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Decision making is the process by which actions are constructed and initiated. Across many research streams, this can be explained in terms of three broad cognitive processes: cognitive abilities that construct judgements and potential courses of action, and interacting monitoring and control processes that determine when to initiate them as behaviour. The aim of this research was to investigate the generality of individual differences in these processes, and their power to predict patterns of decision behaviour identified in our previous research. Undergraduate participants (N = 364) completed nine tests assessing cognitive abilities, monitoring confidence, control thresholds and various patterns of decision behaviour. The tests differed in their cognitive ability requirements and the nature of the payoffs associated with decisions. Cognitive abilities were a strong predictor of individuals' decision competence and optimality, while monitoring confidence and control thresholds were strong and unique predictors of their overall decisiveness, and reckless and hesitant errors. These results were strongest when the measures of cognitive abilities and monitoring confidence were derived from tests with the same cognitive requirements as the tests used to derive the decision behaviours and when the control threshold measure was derived from tests with the same decision payoffs as the test used to derive the decision behaviours. This effect was particularly pronounced for control thresholds, highlighting the domain-specific nature of cognitive control processes. These findings demonstrate how cognitive abilities, monitoring output and control thresholds interact with cognitive requirements and context-specific payoffs to drive individual differences in decision-making behaviour.
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
... To add to this, the SDGs have been under scrutiny for being "inconsistent, difficult to quantify, implement and monitor" (Swain 2018, p. 341), leading to no clear path of how leadership styles and choices can influence decision-making in the process of understanding the complexity within these challenges. More specifically, there are gaps in connecting the SDG goals to educational outcomes, and a lack of connection or responsibility to the environment and consensus of terms related to sustainability, further exacerbating confounding challenges that must be addressed and causing additional barriers to leadership training (Jackson et al. 2017). While the SDG collectively is regarded as a fresh way of thinking and working on issues such as education, climate, and poverty, it is widely accepted that sustainability overall is a complex problem and today remains a challenging problem. ...
... There are gaps in connecting the SDG goals to educational outcomes, a lack of connection or responsibility to the environment, and consensus of terms related to sustainability (Jackson et al. 2017), exhibiting confounding challenges that must be addressed and causing barriers to leadership training. Therefore, leaders' core values must align with and is what promotes sustainability in the role of ethical leadership in HEIs. ...
... Finally, research on the impact of leadership training on the moral development of leaders and followers is essential to this field (Kanungo 2001). Areas of future research include additional study on determining how tools can be used to improve judgment practices (Ell and Haigh 2015), more explanation and justification of the leaders for their actions in ethical leadership training in ESD; links between ethical decision-making and leadership in ethical leadership training for ESD; the effectiveness of ethical leadership training (Lawton and Páez 2015); moral theory dealing with risk (Erman and Möller 2018); decision-making factors (Jackson et al. 2017); assessment/situational judgment tests (SJT); culture as sustainable development (Bender and Haller 2017); mindset, attitudes (ecocentric versus anthropocentric), and culture; views about interconnectedness with natural world and sustainability; case studies on successful implementation of programs; survey of the importance of ethics in schools; ethical foundation in university curricula; scaling ethical aspects as a learning process and identifying what is ethically acceptable and what can be changed in order to scale; readiness to teach, decisionmaking model, social influence pressure, dual roles, and role-modeling/peer-assisted models (Passi and Neil 2016); and feedback from supervisor/teacher. Future research can be conducted on how the current ethical leadership framework in this study could guide developing a moral compass for other leadership styles. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
Leaders today are tasked to be future-focused; work in ambiguity, change, and crisis; are willing to coordinate, share efforts, and be environmentally conscious; and are expected to promote ethical behavior and standards (Iftakhar and Bahauddin, Why leadership is essential for achieving sustainable development goals. Retrieved February 18, 2020, from https://intpolicydigest.org/2018/01/10/why-leadership-is-essential-for-achieving-sustainable-development-goals/, 2018). Despite ethical leadership concepts being well studied, there is little research on ethical leadership training regarding sustainability. Furthermore, the relationship between ethical leadership and sustainability, and the role of leaders creating a moral climate has been underrepresented in the Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) leadership training field (Omer, Sustainable development and the ethical issue of human morality; an overview. Retrieved from https://medinanet.org/2014/12/sustainable-development-and-the-ethical-issue-of-human-morality-an-overview/, 2014). The purpose of this chapter is to explore literature from various current articles regarding the topic of ethical leadership development and sustainability, reveal the gaps, and show how transformational leadership, a theory of leadership in the field of global leadership, can be used as a framework for ethical decision-making. A qualitative comparison analysis was used to identify research gaps in ethical leadership training for ESD. It also revealed that making ethical decisions showed the most significant factor in creating a moral compass. The findings led to the development of an ethical decision-making conceptual framework using transformational leadership dimensions and the three main ethical approaches to normative ethics. This framework can be used for ethical leadership development training, and for educators and scholars to use as a guide in developing their framework when determining how to cultivate and lead with a reliable moral compass.
... Related progress shows that due to the large number of individuals involved in decisionmaking, informal forms of cooperation, and high preference heterogeneity, there is a high degree of initial disagreement, low communication effectiveness, and weak willingness to cooperate in the process of group interaction to form consensus. Jackson et al. [20] pointed out that the larger size of decision participants in open situations (often larger than 20); the personality characteristics, knowledge, and industry background of decision-makers; and other factors lead to a higher possibility of cognitive bias among individuals. Han et al. [21] found that in the absence of effective decision constraints and both extreme value decisions and optimal value decisions, not only do group opinions have the characteristic of bursting out with external stimuli, but they also often lead to higher initial disagreement in decisions due to the lack of conflict regulation ability. ...
... Related advances have shown that there are significant differences in the interactability properties of individual preference information in decision situations of weak relationships, and the interaction information of the group is narrow in scope; i.e., it is formally filled with a large number of multiple sources and types of subjective indirect information about decision interactions, but in substance, there is relatively little objective direct information that can produce knowledge growth, ability enhancement, or cognitive updating for different interaction objects [27]. In this regard, Jackson et al. [20] argued that groups would collectively shape the cognitive processing style and thought inertia of decision information, transforming the uncertainty of this information with respect to the integrated expectation level of established decision-makers [21] in order to become valid information and be received, selected, and iterated by themselves. ...
Article
Full-text available
The fusion of large group decision-making preferences is generally based on hard constraints, and the general low-consensus heterogeneous preference interaction situation of weak relationship decision-making under soft constraints has not been investigated. This study puts forward the preference connotation structure and preference attributes of the intertemporal decision-making of weak relationships groups, objective preference comparison standards between individuals, preference interaction neighborhoods between individuals, preference learning adjustment rules, and preference cycle interaction result evaluation connotations. On this basis, this research constructs a multistage and multiple-round intertemporal decision-making preference dynamic fusion theory and a method for weak relationship large groups. The simulation results verify and support the constructed preference fusion theory and method, indicating that a relatively rational interactive learning and adjustment process can improve the group decision-making performance of the key digital technology R&D team for offshore wind power project construction, operation, and maintenance and effectively improve the convergence level, convergence time, comprehensive decision-making benefits, and decision-making cognition. In the increasingly open large group intertemporal decision-making situation, these research viewpoints and conclusions will help to expand the strong relationship hypotheses of preference fusion in previous group decision-making research. The research opinions and conclusions supplement the theory and method of preference interaction fusion under soft constraints in large group decision-making.
... Similarities involve not only outcomes but also postulated mechanisms. Individuals with low confidence tend to be less decisive [99], give up easier after failing (as described by the preoccupation dimension of action control), and have difficulty overcoming and navigating through daily tasks [100] (as described by hesitation dimension of action control). On top of that, both confidence magnitude judgements [29] and action control [3] are strongly associated with positive affect. ...
Article
Full-text available
The art of making good choices and being consistent in executing them is essential for having a successful and fulfilling life. Individual differences in action control are believed to have a crucial impact on how we make choices and whether we put them in action. Action-oriented people are more decisive, flexible and likely to implement their intentions in the face of adversity. In contrast, state-oriented people often struggle to commit to their choices and end up second-guessing themselves. Here, we employ a model-based computational approach to study the underlying cognitive differences between action and state-oriented people in simple binary-choice decision tasks. In Experiment 1 we show that there is little-to-no evidence that the two groups differ in terms of decision-related parameters and strong evidence for differences in metacognitive bias. Action-oriented people exhibit greater confidence in the correctness of their choices as well as slightly elevated judgement sensitivity, although no differences in performance are present. In Experiment 2 we replicate this effect and show that the confidence gap generalizes to value-based decisions, widens as a function of difficulty and is independent of deliberation interval. Furthermore, allowing more time for confidence deliberation indicated that state-oriented people focus more strongly on external features of choice. We propose that a positive confidence bias, coupled with appropriate metacognitive sensitivity, might be crucial for the successful realization of intentions in many real-life situations. More generally, our study provides an example of how modelling latent cognitive processes can bring meaningful insight into the study of individual differences.
... Research shows that cognitive ability influences decision accuracy (e.g. Bröder, 2003;Bröder & Newell, 2008;Bruine de Bruin et al., 2007;Cokely & Kelley, 2009;Jackson et al., 2017;Stanovich & West, 2000). ...
... At a more mechanistic level, research by Kleitman and colleagues points to metacognitive factors that may contribute to individual differences in thinking dispositions and help explain why some people are more susceptible to faulty reasoning: monitoring confidence and control thresholds (Jackson et al., 2016, but see also Jackson et al., 2017 andKleitman et al., 2019). The first factor, monitoring confidence, refers to 1) "monitoring," the process by which evidence accumulates in a decision-making model, and 2) "confidence," how much weight is given to evidence as it accumulates. ...
Article
A hallmark of intelligent behavior is rationality – the disposition and ability to think analytically to make decisions that maximize expected utility or follow the laws of probability. However, the question remains as to whether rationality and intelligence are empirically distinct, as does the question of what cognitive mechanisms underlie individual differences in rationality. In a sample of 331 participants, we assessed the relationship between rationality and intelligence. There was a common ability underpinning performance on some, but not all, rationality tests. Latent factors representing rationality and general intelligence were strongly correlated (r = .54), but their correlation fell well short of unity. Rationality correlated significantly with fluid intelligence (r = .56), working memory capacity (r = .44), and attention control (r = .49). Attention control fully accounted for the relationship between working memory capacity and rationality, and partially accounted for the relationship between fluid intelligence and rationality. We conclude by speculating about factors rationality tests may tap that other cognitive ability tests miss, and outline directions for further research.
... It is noteworthy that several experimental manipulations were used to invoke intuitive versus deliberative decision making, and one of them refers to the manipulation of decision time (Carter, Kaufmann, & Wagner, 2017, Kirchler et al., 2017, Lohse, Simon, & Konrad, 2018Young, Goodie, Hall, & Wu, 2012); other studies have applied tasks that involved the cognitive processing of information (Fehrenbacher, Schulz, & Rotaru, 2018;Jackson, Kleitman, Stankov, & Howie, 2017;Lakeh & Ghaffarzadegan, 2015. That way, the latent interest of the scientific community around the variables "time" and "information" can be perceived in the recent developments of the decision theory. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This article aims to theoretically discuss if there is a difference in the influence of time and information on the decision making process of cognitively more reflective individuals in relation to cognitively less reflective individuals. In addition, the effort of this research sought to construct a methodological proposal for the development of the study from an experimental approach. It is understood that the discussions carried out allow clarifying the recent developments in Decision Theory. Keywords: Time pressure. Information. Bounded rationality. Dual-process theory. Experiment.
Article
Individual variation in attitudes is hindering our efforts to address global anthropogenic climate change. To better understand climate change deniers, we considered the relationship between climate change denial and environmentalism constructs through an individual differences perspective. We aimed to identify the personality traits associated with climate change denial, environmental self-concept, and pro-environmental behaviours. We measured personality using the Big Five Aspect Scales. Using hierarchical multiple regressions, we determined the personality profile that predicts climate change denial, ecological self-concept, and pro-environmental behaviour. At the domain level, the Openness/Intellect domain significantly predicted each of the environmental constructs, and the Agreeableness domain was predictive of ecological self-concept and climate change acceptance. At the aspect level, the Openness aspect was the primary personality predictor for each construct. Our results demonstrate that aspect level analyses could be more efficacious than domain level analysis, as they have greater specificity and explanatory power.
Article
Full-text available
While some individuals are able to confidently make competent choices, others make poor decisions but are unjustifiably confident. What are their individual characteristics? This study examined individual differences in cognitive and metacognitive competence and arrogance. In doing so, we determined the role of metacognitive confidence and self-monitoring in competence and arrogance. We also investigated the predictive validity of the resulting model to decision-making competence. Psychology undergraduates (N = 180) completed measures of intelligence, on-task confidence, arrogant-and dogmatic-like traits and thinking dispositions. Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed that the most parsimonious solution was a hierarchical two-factor model defined by broad Cognitive and Metacognitive Competence and Arrogance factors. The broad Competence was defined by positive loadings from Intelligence and Confidence factors and a negative loading from the Dogmatism factor. The broad Arrogance factor was defined by positive loadings from Confidence, Arrogance, and Dogmatism factors, but no loading from the Intelligence. Therefore, the study determined that the Confidence trait loaded on both factors while a first-order Intelligence factor loaded on Competence only. Thus, while arrogant individuals were as confident as competent individuals, this confidence was not justified by their performance and ability. Moreover, Arrogance positively predicted higher bias, confidence, prediction and evaluation estimates, but not actual performance on a decision task. In contrast, the Competence factor positively predicted the accuracy of performance. Supporting and extending the Koriat’s (1997) cue utilization theory, the current results indicated that test- and (systematic) individual-specific sources of diagnostic cues underlie judgment accuracy, however, they seem to play different roles for individuals based on their relative standing within the Cognitive and Metacognitive Competence and Arrogance taxonomy. Extending Dunning et.al (2003), some “people tend to be blissfully unaware of their incompetence” and are “triply cursed” as they are also dogmatic.
Article
Full-text available
We review the progress of naturalistic decision making (NDM) in the decade since the first conference on the subject in 1989. After setting out a brief history of NDM we identify its essential characteristics and consider five of its main contributions: recognition-primed decisions, coping with uncertainty, team decision making, decision errors, and methodology. NDM helped identify important areas of inquiry previously neglected (e.g. the use of expertise in sizing up situations and generating options), it introduced new models, conceptualizations, and methods, and recruited applied investigators into the field. Above all, NDM contributed a new perspective on how decisions (broadly defined as committing oneself to a certain course of action) are made. NDM still faces significant challenges, including improvement of the quantity and rigor of its empirical research, and confirming the validity of its prescriptive models. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Article
Full-text available
This paper investigated decision pattern analysis (DPA) as a general and standard framework for studying individuals’ consistent decision making behavior within and between contexts. DPA classifies decisions on the basis of judgement accuracy and the goal orientation of the decided-upon action. Over repeated decisions, patterns of individuals’ decision behavior are described by five variables: competence, optimality, recklessness, hesitancy and decisiveness. A fictitious medical decision making test and three standard cognitive ability tests (extended with confidence ratings and a ‘submit answer for marking’ decision) were used to investigate the psychometric properties of these DPA variables. Internal consistency of the decision patterns ranged from good to excellent. Convergent validity was assessed via cognitive abilities, metacognitive confidence and a control criterion imposed on confidence that determines the decision to be made: the point of sufficient certainty. Personality variables were included to assess discriminant validity. As hypothesised, cognitive abilities showed positive correlations with competence and optimality. High confidence, low points of sufficient certainty and a greater discrepancy between them were associated with higher decisiveness and recklessness, and lower hesitancy. Personality measures showed mixed and generally weak correlations with the DPA variables. These convergent and discriminant results also held after controlling for all variables in regression. The results provide preliminary psychometric support for DPA as a general framework of behavioral decision making. DPA has the potential to be exploited in many contexts for uses that, to date, have been unachievable in a psychometrically valid manner.
Article
Full-text available
The quantitative study of decision-making has traditionally rested on three key behavioral measures: accuracy, response time, and confidence. Of these, confidence-defined as the degree of belief, prior to feedback, that a decision is correct-is least well understood at the level of neural mechanism, although recent years have seen a surge in interest in the topic among theoretical and systems neuroscientists. Here we review some of these developments and highlight a particular candidate mechanism for assigning confidence in a perceptual decision. The mechanism is appealing because it is rooted in the same decision-making framework-bounded accumulation of evidence-that successfully explains accuracy and reaction time in many tasks, and it is validated by neurophysiology and microstimulation experiments. Copyright © 2014 Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; all rights reserved.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
We investigated the effects of total sleep deprivation (TSD) and accumulated sleep debt on cognitive, executive and metacognitive components of decision making (DM). With ample literature on cognitive operations in DM, its efficacy depends on less-researched metacognitive abilities. Metacognitive confidence (as a subjective experience of accuracy) and its calibration against reality are critical to optimising DM processes. Fourteen Australian Army personnel (all Male, Mage = 24.36 years) attended the lab for two consecutive weeks over which repeated measures of psychomotor vigilance, inhibitory control, task switching, working memory, short-term memory, fluid intelligence, workload (NASA-TLX), and measures of decision confidence and quality were obtained. In week two, this was done in conjunction with 40-hr TSD, followed by two evenings of only 5-hour sleep opportunities, and finally an evening of unrestricted sleep. Performance on vigilance and inhibitory tasks declined immediately after TSD. The same effect was less pronounced for working memory and short-term memory. No effect was observed for fluid reasoning. Self-reported workload showed a trend convergent with the simpler tasks such as vigilance. In contrast, task switching remained unaffected by sleep loss. Confidence followed the same trajectory as short-term memory ability through the experiment. That is, participants appeared to adjust their confidence appropriately given changes in their performance. Participants’ capacity to act on correct judgements and reject incorrect ones remained stable under accumulating sleep loss. However, there was a moderate increase in mistakenly acted upon incorrect judgements (overconfidence errors), and a decline in mistakenly rejected accurate judgements. Overall, results indicate that the known decline in complex DM performance under sleep loss conditions might be mediated by metacognitive mechanisms. Examining the role of metacognitive and decision factors in realistic scenarios might prove to be a productive focus for future investigation of countermeasures to mitigate the impact of sleep loss on DM.
Article
Raven's progressive matrices are considered a measure of inductive reasoning. However, there is evidence to suggest that they are not unidimensional, and they may measure visuospatial ability in addition to inductive reasoning. We investigated the psychometric properties of several versions of the Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM). Confirmatory factor analyses and Rasch analyses were used to investigate the dimensionality of the test, sex differences regarding dimensionality, and the utility of proposed taxonomies of item solution strategies. Three samples were administered three different forms of the test. Sample 1 consisted of 1297 individuals (929 females) who completed a 12-item short form; Sample 2 consisted of 455 individuals (327 females) who completed the full APM; and Sample 3 consisted of 362 individuals (244 females) who completed a 15-item short form. Results indicated that all three forms of the APM are unidimensional and measurement invariant across sex. There was little support for the validity of the taxonomies of solution strategies.