The erosion of rationality in high vulnerability conditions: A cognitive-disruption perspective

Traci Freling, Ritesh Saini, Zhiyong Yang
{"title":"The erosion of rationality in high vulnerability conditions: A cognitive-disruption perspective","authors":"Traci Freling,&nbsp;Ritesh Saini,&nbsp;Zhiyong Yang","doi":"10.1002/cjas.1767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This research examines how a decision-maker's perceived vulnerability influences their susceptibility to the “anecdotal bias,” a phenomenon where statistical evidence is disregarded in favor of anecdotal information. Across six studies, our research shows that high vulnerability aggravates the anecdotal bias instead of reducing it. Study 1 provides preliminary evidence that high vulnerability exacerbates the anecdotal bias among individuals seeking decision-relevant information in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies 2A and 2B demonstrate that high vulnerability intensifies the anecdotal bias in different decision contexts. Study 3 replicates these findings and identifies negative emotional arousal as a key mechanism underlying this effect. Study 4 examines the moderating role of personal relevance, showing that when individuals make decisions for others (vs. themselves), high vulnerability does not lead to the anecdotal bias. Moreover, it is cognitive disruption and intuitive thinking caused by negative emotional arousal that increases reliance on anecdotal (vs. statistical) information. Finally, Study 5 demonstrates the moderating effect of mindfulness meditation, highlighting its role as a preemptive safeguard against this biased behavior. Theoretical contributions and practical implications of these findings are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47349,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De L Administration","volume":"41 4","pages":"577-598"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cjas.1767","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De L Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cjas.1767","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This research examines how a decision-maker's perceived vulnerability influences their susceptibility to the “anecdotal bias,” a phenomenon where statistical evidence is disregarded in favor of anecdotal information. Across six studies, our research shows that high vulnerability aggravates the anecdotal bias instead of reducing it. Study 1 provides preliminary evidence that high vulnerability exacerbates the anecdotal bias among individuals seeking decision-relevant information in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies 2A and 2B demonstrate that high vulnerability intensifies the anecdotal bias in different decision contexts. Study 3 replicates these findings and identifies negative emotional arousal as a key mechanism underlying this effect. Study 4 examines the moderating role of personal relevance, showing that when individuals make decisions for others (vs. themselves), high vulnerability does not lead to the anecdotal bias. Moreover, it is cognitive disruption and intuitive thinking caused by negative emotional arousal that increases reliance on anecdotal (vs. statistical) information. Finally, Study 5 demonstrates the moderating effect of mindfulness meditation, highlighting its role as a preemptive safeguard against this biased behavior. Theoretical contributions and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.60%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (CJAS) is a multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed, international quarterly that publishes manuscripts with a strong theoretical foundation. The journal welcomes literature reviews, quantitative and qualitative studies as well as conceptual pieces. CJAS is an ISI-listed journal that publishes papers in all key disciplines of business. CJAS is a particularly suitable home for manuscripts of a crossdisciplinary nature. All papers must state in an explicit and compelling way their unique contribution to advancing theory and/or practice in the administrative sciences.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information How startups create new knowledge that spark disruptive innovations The impact of big data on decision-making, processes and organizational change: An essay of synthesis The erosion of rationality in high vulnerability conditions: A cognitive-disruption perspective Issue Information
×
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