Three Roads to Commitment: A Trimodal Theory of Decision Making

Three Roads to Commitment: A Trimodal Theory of Decision Making 3
Figure Captions
Figure 1. The TDM framework, showing successful transitions from the initial state associated with each decision
mode to commitment to a singular course of action, which is followed by reassessment and/or implementation.
Figure 2. How various research paradigms are represented in the TDM framework, from left to right, top to bottom:
the normative core of Rational Choice Theory, Klein’s Recognition-Primed Decision Making (RPD) model,
Connolly’s hedge clipping strategy; Beach’s Image Theory.
Figure 3. Representation in TDM framework of five decision types in Orasanu & Fischer’s (1997) decision
taxonomy. Top left: Condition-action and Go-No Go. Bottom left: Choice. Middle column: Procedural management.
Right column: Scheduling. Broken lines represent ways the decision cycle can fail to deliver an actionable
commitment.
Figure 4. Story building in the TDM framework (above) and evolution of corresponding story model (below). In
story models, lightly outlined rectangles are expectations, planned actions, or hypothesized explanations. Heavily
outlined rectangles are events or actions that have been observed. Arrows represent causal influence. X’s mark
violations of expectations, and dotted lines show how rebuttals are used to explain these failures. Broken lines
represent ways the decision cycle can fail to deliver an actionable commitment.
Figure 5. TDM model of action uncertainty. Ovals represent types of uncertainty, and rounded rectangles represent
methods. Broken lines represent ways the decision cycle can fail to deliver an actionable commitment.
Figure 6. Increase in degree of success as a function of time or cognitive effort invested, for different uncertainty
handling methods.
3