Challenging the doctrine of “non-discerning” decision-making: Investigating the interaction effects of cognitive styles

IF 4.9 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology Pub Date : 2023-09-20 DOI:10.1111/joop.12467
Bjørn Tallak Bakken, Mathias Hansson, Thorvald Hærem
{"title":"Challenging the doctrine of “non-discerning” decision-making: Investigating the interaction effects of cognitive styles","authors":"Bjørn Tallak Bakken,&nbsp;Mathias Hansson,&nbsp;Thorvald Hærem","doi":"10.1111/joop.12467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The impact of intuitive and analytic cognitive styles on task performance is a much-debated subject in the scientific discourse on decision-making. In the literature on decision-making under time pressure, intuition has been regarded as a fast and frugal tool. At the same time, the heuristics and biases tradition sees intuition as a source of errors, implying that more analytic decision-makers are less biased and better performers. We conducted two studies of the effects of interplay between intuitive and analytic cognitive styles on decision-making in a simulated wicked learning environment. The results of the first study revealed that the high-performing individuals were those who exhibited a strong preference for both cognitive styles, as well as those who showed a lack of preference for both. Individuals with a strong preference for only one of the styles were outperformed. In the second study, we replicated these findings in a team context. Post-hoc, we found that cognitive ability correlated highly with performance for the two high-performing style combinations but not for the two low-performing style combinations. Our results indicate that flexible style preferences boost the effect of cognitive ability, while strong preferences for a single style may entrench even those with high cognitive abilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":48330,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology","volume":"97 1","pages":"209-232"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/joop.12467","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joop.12467","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The impact of intuitive and analytic cognitive styles on task performance is a much-debated subject in the scientific discourse on decision-making. In the literature on decision-making under time pressure, intuition has been regarded as a fast and frugal tool. At the same time, the heuristics and biases tradition sees intuition as a source of errors, implying that more analytic decision-makers are less biased and better performers. We conducted two studies of the effects of interplay between intuitive and analytic cognitive styles on decision-making in a simulated wicked learning environment. The results of the first study revealed that the high-performing individuals were those who exhibited a strong preference for both cognitive styles, as well as those who showed a lack of preference for both. Individuals with a strong preference for only one of the styles were outperformed. In the second study, we replicated these findings in a team context. Post-hoc, we found that cognitive ability correlated highly with performance for the two high-performing style combinations but not for the two low-performing style combinations. Our results indicate that flexible style preferences boost the effect of cognitive ability, while strong preferences for a single style may entrench even those with high cognitive abilities.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
挑战 "非辨别型 "决策理论:调查认知风格的交互效应
在有关决策的科学讨论中,直觉和分析两种认知风格对任务绩效的影响是一个备受争议的话题。在有关时间压力下决策的文献中,直觉一直被视为快速、节俭的工具。同时,启发式和偏见传统认为直觉是错误的根源,这意味着分析能力更强的决策者偏见更少,表现更好。我们进行了两项研究,探讨直觉型和分析型认知风格之间的相互作用对模拟邪恶学习环境中决策的影响。第一项研究的结果显示,表现出强烈偏好两种认知风格的人,以及对两种认知风格都缺乏偏好的人,都是表现优异的人。而只对其中一种认知方式有强烈偏好的人则表现较差。在第二项研究中,我们在团队背景下重复了这些发现。事后,我们发现认知能力与两种高绩效风格组合的绩效高度相关,但与两种低绩效风格组合的绩效无关。我们的结果表明,灵活的风格偏好会增强认知能力的效果,而对单一风格的强烈偏好则可能会使认知能力高的人更加固化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology aims to increase understanding of people and organisations at work including: - industrial, organizational, work, vocational and personnel psychology - behavioural and cognitive aspects of industrial relations - ergonomics and human factors Innovative or interdisciplinary approaches with a psychological emphasis are particularly welcome. So are papers which develop the links between occupational/organisational psychology and other areas of the discipline, such as social and cognitive psychology.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Who's on the boss's radar? Examination of the antecedent and consequence of leader voice solicitation Issue Information How much do family‐supportive supervisor behaviours matter? A meta‐analysis based on the ability‐motivation‐opportunity framework Uneventful days? A cautionary tale about the underestimated role of triggering events in employee silence research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1