A decision science blind to decision procedures would be “unfair”: The effect of decision process on decision-outcome satisfaction and subsequent choice in a performance environment
Daniel A. DeCaro, Joseph E. Johnson
Abstract
Open-access reader
Daniel A. DeCaro, Joseph E. Johnson
Abstract
Open-access reader
A decision science blind to decision procedures would be ”unfair”: The effect of decision process on decision-outcome satisfaction and subsequent choice in a performance environment Daniel DeCaro Miami University (MU) Joseph Johnson Mimia Univeristy (MU) Abstract: Contemporary models of decision making assume individuals evaluate options solely in terms of their ex- pected outcomes. However, recent research indicates that in institutional settings decision makers are also concerned with the procedural fairness of the decision process that generates those outcomes, such as whether decision makers were granted democratic inclusion in the decision-making process itself. We provide a much-needed quantification of the value decision makers place on inclusive decision procedures, showing (a) the pattern by which decision proce- dures alter individuals’ perceptions of otherwise identical outcomes, spanning losses and gains of differing quantity and quality (e.g., failure/success) and (b) that decision makers’ felt freedom and feeling of being treated respectfully mediate the effect of decision process on the perception of outcomes. We show that individuals prefer lesser economic returns in order to receive higher utility from the decision process, and we discuss the implications of this finding for decision science.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
A decision science blind to decision procedures would be ”unfair”: The effect of decision process on decision-outcome satisfaction and subsequent choice in a performance environment Daniel DeCaro Miami University (MU) Joseph Johnson Mimia Univeristy (MU) Abstract: Contemporary models of decision making assume individuals evaluate options solely in terms of their ex- pected outcomes. However, recent research indicates that in institutional settings decision makers are also concerned with the procedural fairness of the decision process that generates those outcomes, such as whether decision makers were granted democratic inclusion in the decision-making process itself. We provide a much-needed quantification of the value decision makers place on inclusive decision procedures, showing (a) the pattern by which decision proce- dures alter individuals’ perceptions of otherwise identical outcomes, spanning losses and gains of differing quantity and quality (e.g., failure/success) and (b) that decision makers’ felt freedom and feeling of being treated respectfully mediate the effect of decision process on the perception of outcomes. We show that individuals prefer lesser economic returns in order to receive higher utility from the decision process, and we discuss the implications of this finding for decision science.
Key concepts: Decision field theory, Decision analysis, Decision engineering, Business decision mapping, Decision quality, Evidential reasoning approach, R-CAST, Decision fatigue