Suchergebnisse

It has been recently argued that managers do not use creative problem‐solving techniques because of concerns about managing the ideas produced. This paper examines five different ways of "closing down" during creative problem solving, and suggests factors which influence the selection of a technique: voting is the preferred choice for consensus‐seeking; clustering is a means of transforming data qualitatively; hurdles provide a means of managing data arriving over disparate time periods; weighting is best reserved for standard and quantifiable data; while gut feel can deal best with decision making involving "fuzzy" data. A psychological rationale for the use of the various techniques is proposed, and a contingency model of decision making developed which may give managers confidence to experiment with the creative problem‐solving mechanisms for generating options, because of increased knowledge of effective mechanisms subsequently for closing down those options.

ABSTRACTDespite the development of increasingly sophisticated and refined multicriteria decision‐making (MCDM) methods, an examination of the experimental evidence indicates that users most often prefer relatively unsophisticated methods. In this paper, we synthesize theories and empirical findings from the psychology of judgment and choice to provide a new theoretical explanation for such user preferences. Our argument centers on the assertion that the MCDM method preferred by decision makers is a function of the degree to which the method tends to introduce decisional conflict. The model we develop relates response mode, decision strategy, and the salience of decisional conflict to user preferences among decision aids. We then show that the model is consistent with empirical results in MCDM studies. Next, the role of decisional conflict in problem formulation aids is briefly discussed. Finally, we outline future research needed to thoroughly test the theoretical mechanisms we have proposed.

Age-related macular disease (AMD) is a multifactorial degenerative condition affecting the central area of the retina. Patients with AMD report that eye care practitioners are not giving consistent advice regarding nutrition and reported confusion as to what advice, if any, to follow. The aim of this study was to design and conduct a preliminary evaluation of a flowchart to support eye care practitioners in providing accurate, evidence-based nutritional advice to their patients. A flowchart was designed to take practitioners through a decision-making process that would determine whether a patient matched the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) 2 eligibility criteria for supplementation. The flowchart was evaluated using a qualified and student optometrist cohort, with both cohorts completing confidence scales and students completing clinical scenarios. Qualified participants showed a significant increase in confidence scores from the initial survey ( M = 69.7%, standard deviation [ SD] = 16.2%) to the second survey after use of the flowchart for 2 weeks ( M = 82.1%, SD = 11.6%; t(45) = 7.33, p < .001; rs = .61, p < .001). The student participants also increased confidence scored after receiving the flowchart ( M of first survey = 41.7, SD = 14.6; M of second survey = 69.1, SD = 1.7; t(25) = 7.92, d = .81, p < .001) and increased the number of correct answers on five clinical scenarios. Overall, the flowchart has proved to be useful in boosting the self-efficacy of both qualified practitioners and student practitioners, as well as improving clinical decisions made by student practitioners.