Explaining choice quality with decision style, cognitive reflection and decision environment

Tommi Pajala

Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2019, vol. 70, issue 9, 1410-1424

Abstract: Psychological measures of decision making could help researchers better understand and model individual differences in Multiple Criteria Decision Making. However, such measures have so far gained little traction in behavioral operational research. I investigate whether decision style, cognitive reflection, and tendency to maximise, together with the decision environment, can explain choice quality. 159 participants answered the psychological measures and made 26 choices in a setting with six alternatives and six criteria. According to the Bayesian analysis, low cognitive reflection and high need to explore alternatives were related to a higher chance of making errors in choices. This indicates that psychological measures have explanatory power in MCDM, and that the relationship to choice quality is not always in the expected direction.

Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01605682.2018.1495994 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:tjorxx:v:70:y:2019:i:9:p:1410-1424

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/tjor20

DOI: 10.1080/01605682.2018.1495994

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the Operational Research Society is currently edited by Tom Archibald

More articles in Journal of the Operational Research Society from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().