Judgment and Decision-Making
After making this decision if any bloomer is investigated than he tries to defend himself and target others. The top authority do not want to take the duty of wrong decision on himself but want to blame on others and make this mortal decision as a result of a radical decision. This type of concept is called “Looking Up and Looking Around” (LULL).
This is not the case of deficiency or lack of experience of a decision maker but only because of frighten of an unsuccessful person this mortal decision becomes the result of radical decision.
In any form of organization if important decision is to be taken, then it is good to have ore number of people so that if any bloomer is investigated than it is divided among all & it makes easier to find the base of the mistakes committed. There are many types of blames which involves the conveyance of one to other. First of all there are some guys called “Fall Guys” who takes the blame or responsibility of failure decision on themselves. Secondly, there are some people called “Escape-Goat” which are binge out from the organization for not deserving the blame.
When a person is hired & he does not know that the person who was there previously in his lace had made mistake & his mistake is blamed on him. After looking at all of this “Jackal” says that the key concept is to make effort to protect yourself & try to protect the other group from suffer of the blame instead of accepting the bloomer perpetrated. Practical Experience In February I got a Job in DHAL warehouse where my work was to do receiving and pick packing. After two months there was a barbeques and dance party for all the employees of DHAL including Head of the Department.
Work was divided among each person and in the end all came with their budget and expense and the expense was ore than the budget. All the excess expense were paid by the committee member and in the end when rap time came all were mum and they started incriminating to our new general manager. He bends out to be a “Fall Guy’. After that the whole committee member checked the account details and fund for the last year and came to know that the previous manager took out some money from the fund and commence us with a few embark on money.
This is the complete illustration of Article 2 frames’. The article analyses the cognitive as well as psychophysical factors which help in ending out the value of the risky prospects. This article mainly challenges both theoretically as well as empirically the classical utility theory. This article presents how managers or rather human beings behave in real economic situations. In this article a systematic approach towards risky choices which helps in deriving several hypotheses for psychophysical analysis of various reactions towards probability as well as money have been discussed.
By choosing risk aversion and Bernoulli (1954) essay the authors have tried to explain why most people are usually found to be verse towards risk and why the degree of risk aversion lessens with rising wealth. In order to tackle the normative issues the author shifts focus from psychology to the decision theory. According to the Modern Decision Theory the risky prospects are being characterized by the probable results as well as the probabilities of all the results.
The standard economic model suggests that all the human beings depict a very stable “utility curve” which is being implied by their choices but this article attacks directly on the axiom of extensionally. Therefore it is proposed in this article hat alternative framings need systematic examination which presents a helpful and highly beneficial reflective device which can easily be of advantage for the decision makers to assess all the values, attached with the primary as well as secondary consequences of their choices.
The article specifies that mostly stability results because of loss aversion instead of change. Therefore both loss aversion as well as effects of consequent endowment is very unlikely to play very insignificant role in the economic exchanges which take place every day or in routine. Thus finally it explains he difference between the experience value and the decision value. The decision theory does not provide major distinction between the two because it is mostly assumed that the decision values and experience values are coinciding with each other (Keenan and Thieves, 1984).
Practical Experience In India when I was doing Bachelors my friends were playing a cricket betting on the internet and were earning a lot, so I talked to my friend and ask him how to play. He told me and I was eager to play the cricket betting. After few days there was a cricket match between India and Pakistan I decided to bet against India. At that time it was like if India wins you will get double money and for Pakistan you will get four times the money you invest. I was having $1000, so I thought to invest $100 I. E.
I was thinking to be risk aversion rather than risk seeking because I was betting for the first time. After the match got finish India won and I got $200. But if I would have played $200 for India and $100 for Pakistan then I would have earned more in playing risk seeking than playing as risk aversion. Article 3 Abstract: Reading 3. 3, Fischer, B. , Slavic, P. Ad Liechtenstein, S. (1980), ‘Knowing what twine those people who hold values with those people who elicit values. In this research Values’ mean all the evaluative Judgments which are either absolute worth or relative or desirability of the possible events.
Central to the process of psychophysics value is the finding that it is difficult to presume the effective stimulus rather it should be discovered. This article brings together a diverse collection of effects like ‘irrelevant” context effects, response mode, stimulus presentation and organism in order to facilitate the appreciation of the limit up to which the apparent alee of people are influenced by elicit, to give a tentative organization of outcomes along with the contexts in which these might come up and to explicate the effects of these outcomes.
Thus this article explains the labile nature of expressed values and any kind of subtle changes in the elicitation mode is supposed to bring in highly visible effects on the preferences which are mentioned by people. Some impacts are reversible while other are not, some effects lead to deepening of the perspective of respondents while others do not; some impacts are deliberately brought about, while there are not; some impacts are very highly specific to the questions of value, while others Just impact all the kinds of Judgments; some are well documented, while others are simple speculations.
If one wants to elicit these values one needs to confront these effects which cannot be avoided. The best way to have an interaction with our respondents and also to help them in making value Judgments which are in their best of interest is to provide them with better and newer analytical tools. These tools are very helpful in changing the respondents by deepening their perspectives. The main aim of this article is to deliver the message to consider multiple perspectives while decision-making (Fishhook, Slavic and Liechtenstein, 1980).
Once my father wants to invest in his new business at that time I was doing ABA in India, so he asked me how I should proceed. He wanted to start Retail store of Grocery. So first of all he made a team of employee who will work in that grocery store. Before that he hired one elicit and put his project besides him. His values were not well defined and were not realistic, so it was difficult for elicit to make his decision. Because of his value were not properly defined it was also difficult for his employee to work in the store.
So in the end his business was not up to the mark and he ended up with a loss. By this example I Just want to say that your values should be realistic and it should be related to the previous environment so that you end up with a good conclusion. Article 4 Abstract: Reading 5. 1 . Zimmermann, H. (1983) ‘The two camps on rationality. This article analyses the ‘rationality concept’ while decision-making and according to Zimmermann (1983) any action is considered to be rational if it is in conjunction with NY individuals’ beliefs as well as values.
The most important research tools for psychology of Judgment as well as decision are the normative tools, while the most vital model for Judgment is ‘Babes Theorem’ along with multivariate utility models while for the normative model of decision the SUE models are very prominent . This human Judgment is found to be limited which causes the violation of the rationality principles. The concept of Judgmental biases suggests that the probabilistic judgment is mostly hugely biased because the individuals mostly rely on heuristics.
In terms of gains and losses the coding outcomes is Just one of the many cognitive mechanisms which people make use of while editing or depicting their decision problems. The third violation of rationality theory occurs while observing the decision-making behavior of people through motivational perspective and several coping patterns which are used by mass while handling stress of various decision situations. In this research the varied deficiencies present in human Judgment as well as decision are being emphasized.
On the other hand the optimists who believe n the rationality theory believe and lay emphasis on the implicit rationality of decision behavior as well as human Judgment. In support of their argument they raise mainly three theoretical arguments which are: the meat-rationality argument, the continuity argument and the structure argument. Therefore the researchers of this camp challenge the belief that human decision as well as Judgment is cognitively deficient.
The author thus suggests that with reference to rationality issue one should be liberal while utilizing the concept of rationality. Secondly the commonality concept should be used in its prescriptive sense in legitimate manner wherever the prescription is being required and thirdly the concept of rationality should be used very cautiously in descriptive research. Practical Experience When I finished my Bachelors education I got a Job in Transformer making and testing company. There were two groups in the company who were working on the same project and I got selected in one of the group.
Both groups were good but one was thinking rationally following the rules, team leader’s advice and setting the destination of making up to the conclusion and others were thinking irrationally not allowing the rules of the company, team leader’s advice to complete the task within less span of time to make themselves feel good in the company. Both were coming to the same conclusion but chief likes the people who fulfill deeds in an optimistic manner and not in a pessimistic manner.
But not all the people will able to follow the qualities of optimistic and fulfill the goals of company rather than being pessimistic and fulfilling the goal of company. Article 5 Abstract: Reading 4. 3. ‘Theories of Risk perception: Who fears what and why? In this article the writer is concentrating on the hypothesis of risk sensing and he fines risk on the foundation of people coming from different aspects like different backgrounds, culture, posture etc. Every individual takes risk on any situation depending on the foundation of situation.
For one person the risk might be higher for decisive situation but for another person the same situation might not be risky for him to handle. Different people look at the venture situation differently. The writer tries to explain Risk sensing through different theories on the foundation of different test or example like “Economic Theory, Knowledge Theory, Political Theory, assist us to realize the role of each in a well defined manner. “Knowledge Theory’ conveys that people recall everything in a different manner I. E. They recall it to be peril and predict it to be grievous or life threatening. Personality Theory’ conveys that more or less mass volition to deal with risk and more or less mass avert to deal with risk. “Economic Theory’ conveys that people loaded with money are happy to deal with risk than the wretched people who are not loaded with money. “Political Theory’ conveys that more or less people deal with risk in order to increase the tutus or tycoon in the surroundings. After doing a proper survey on risk it displays that risk postulates from last many ages and it postulates in many domain and well educated people are functioning on risk hypothesis.
This article helps us to evaluate how condom is the risk and if there is any danger than what are the means to rub this risk. Practical Experience I wanted to share my experience when working as a ‘cashier’ in one of the esteem bank in India (State Bank of India). My Job was to handle all the customer’s bank accounts and look after their each cash transactions. In my hand was having all the personal information of their account details and if there was any problem then I was authorized to take each customer’s secret information like account details, credit or debit card information etc.
All the information of each customer was with me and if anybody could peril of pervert this information and whole rap will seed on me and because of this bank may have to suffer a loss of money or it may harm the reputation of the bank. So in this whole situation it was all depend on the sensing of my risk. If I do not want to have a loss of money to the bank then I should have my aril risk sensing in a positive manner.