Herbert Simon's decision-making approach: Investigation of cognitive processes in experts

This is a post print version of the article. The official published can be obtained from the links below - PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved.Herbert Simon's research endeavor aimed to understand the processes that participate in human decision making. However, despite his effort to investigate this question, his work did not have the impact in the “decision making” community that it had in other fields. His rejection of the assumption of perfect rationality, made in mainstream economics, led him to develop the concept of bounded rationality. Simon's approach also emphasized the limitations of the cognitive system, the change of processes due to expertise, and the direct empirical study of cognitive processes involved in decision making. In this article, we argue that his subsequent research program in problem solving and expertise offered critical tools for studying decision-making processes that took into account his original notion of bounded rationality. Unfortunately, these tools were ignored by the main research paradigms in decision making, such as Tversky and Kahneman's biased rationality approach (also known as the heuristics and biases approach) and the ecological approach advanced by Gigerenzer and others. We make a proposal of how to integrate Simon's approach with the main current approaches to decision making. We argue that this would lead to better models of decision making that are more generalizable, have higher ecological validity, include specification of cognitive processes, and provide a better understanding of the interaction between the characteristics of the cognitive system and the contingencies of the environment

Prospects and problems in modeling group decisions

This paper summarizes some of the major issues related to group decision modeling. We briefly review the existing work on group choice models in marketing and consumer research. We draw some generalizations about which models work well when and use those generalizations to provide guidelines for future research.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/47074/1/11002_2004_Article_BF00554128.pd

Faith in thy threshold

The current study focussed on the decision making processes of jurors. The study investigated how jurors make a decision, if they integrated information within their decision making process, and if cue utilisation thresholds promoted confirmation bias. To do this, 108 participants listened to one of nine cases. These participants were asked to give a likelihood of guilt rating after each piece of evidence, to state what was the last piece of information they needed to make a decision and give a final verdict at the end of a trial. The results highlighted that threshold decision making was being utilised, that information integration may allow thresholds to be reached and that thresholds may promote confirmation bias to reduce cognitive dissonance. In conclusion, this suggests that jurors integrate information until they reach a leading verdict, then the evaluation of information is distorted to support the leading threshold. Implications relate to von Dire and legal instructions

Monitoring clinical quality in rare disease services – experience in England

After some well-publicised problems with paediatric cardiac surgery, there has been great interest in England in monitoring clinical quality in specialised medical services. The National Commissioning Group plans, funds and monitors a set of highly specialised services for the National Health Service in England. We have developed systems for monitoring clinical quality that perform two interrelated but distinct functions: performance measurement and performance improvement. The aim is to collect information on all patients seen during each year – a 100% consecutive case series. Generally, there is no conceptual difficulty identifying an appropriate outcome for surgical interventions: the indication for surgery usually defines the outcome to monitor. This is not so for the medical and psychiatric services, where the relevant outcome to monitor is sometimes not obvious. There are a number of problems in interpreting, and acting on, outcome data for rare conditions and treatments. These problems include statistical problems due to small numbers, the need to risk adjust data and coding problems