208 ReferencesGrosskopf, B., Bereby-Meyer, Y., & Bazerman, M. H. (2007). On the robustness of the winner’scurse phenomenon. Theory and Decision.Grossman, S. J., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1980). On the impossibility of informationally efficient markets.American Economic Review, 70(3), 393–408.Gruenfeld, D. H., Mannix, E. A., Williams, K. Y., & Neale, M. A. (1996). Group composition anddecision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process andperformance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 1–15.Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining.Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 367–388.Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moraljudgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998–1002.Haidt, J., Björklund, F., & Murphy, S. (2007). Moral dumbfounding. Charlotte: University of Virginiaworking paper.Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1999). Smart choices: A practical guide to makingbetter life decisions. New York: Broadway.Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.Harris, G., & Feder, B. (2006, January 27). FDA warns device maker over safety. New YorkTimes, p. C1.Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954). They saw a game: A case study. Journal of Abnormal andSocial Psychology, 49, 129–134.Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., et al. (2001). In search ofHomo Economicus: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. AEA Papers and Proceedings,73–78.Hershey, J. C., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1980). Prospect theory’s reflection hypothesis: A criticalexamination. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 395–418.Ho, T.-H., Camerer, C. F., & Weigelt, K. (1998). Iterated dominance and iterated best response inexperimental ‘‘p-beauty contests.’’ American Economic Review, 88(4), 947–969.Hoch, S. J. (1988). Who do we know: Predicting the interests and opinions of the American consumer.Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 315–324.Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., & Smith, V. (1996). On expectations and the monetary stakes in ultimatumgames. International Journal of Game Theory, 25, 289–302.Holt, J. (2006, December 3). The new, soft paternalism. New York Times, p. 15.Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2008). Speech perception within an auditory cognitive science framework.Current Directions in Psychological Science.Hsee, C. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals betweenjoint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, 67(3), 247–257.Hsee, C. K. (1998). Less is better: When low-value options are valued more highly than high-valueoptions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 107–121.Hsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. H. (1999). Preference reversals betweenjoint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. PsychologicalBulletin, 125(5), 576–590.Idson, L. C., Chugh, D., Bereby-Meyer, Y., Moran, S., Grosskopf, B., & Bazerman, M. H. (2004).Overcoming focusing failures in competitive environments. Journal of Behavioral DecisionMaking, 17(3), 159–172.Iyengar, S. S., Jiang, W., & Huberman, G. (2004). How much choice is too much: Determinantsof individual contributions in 401K retirement plans. In O. S. Mitchell & S. Utkus (Eds.),
References 209Pension design and structure: New lessons from behavioral finance (pp. 83–95). Oxford:Oxford University Press.Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of agood thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995–1006.James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: H. Holt.Janofsky, M. (2004, March 19). Scalia refusing to take himself off Cheney case. New York Timesp. A1.Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to buying winners and selling losers: Implications forstock market efficiency. Journal of Finance, 48(1), 65–91.Johnson, E. J., & Goldstein, D. G. (2003). Do defaults save lives? Science, 302, 1338–1339.Johnson, E. J., & Tversky, A. (1983). Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 45, 20–31.Jones, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Carvallo, M., & Mirenberg, M. C. (2004). How do I love thee? Let mecount the Js: Implicit egotism and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 87, 665–683.Jordan, D. J., & Diltz, J. D. (2003). The profitability of day traders. Financial Analysts Journal,59(6), 85–94.Joyce, E. J., & Biddle, G. C. (1981). Anchoring and adjustment in probabilistic inference in auditing.Journal of Accounting Research, 19, 120–145.Kagel,J.H.,&Levin,D.(1986).The winner’s curse and public information in common valueauditing. American Economic Review, 76, 894–920.Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality.American Psychologist, 58(9), 697–720.Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitutionin intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics andbiases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49–81). New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking:Entitlements and the market. American Economic Review, 76(4), 728–741.Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effectand the Coase Theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1325–1348.Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2006). Would you behappier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science, 312, 1908–1910.Kahneman, D., & Lovallo, D. (1993). Timid choices and bold forecasts: A cognitive perspective onrisk and risk taking. Management Science, 39, 17–31.Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. PsychologicalReview, 93(2), 136–153.Kahneman, D., & Ritov, I. (1994). Determinants of stated willingness to pay for public goods: Astudy in the headline method. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9, 5–38.Kahneman, D., Schkade, D. A., & Sunstein, C. R. (1998). Shared outrage and erratic awards: Thepsychology of punitive damages. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 16, 49–86.Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness.Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 430–454.Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80,237–251.Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica,47(2), 263–291.Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.Science, 211(4481), 453–458.
- Page 3 and 4:
JUDGMENT INMANAGERIALDECISION MAKIN
- Page 5 and 6:
Dedicated toMHB: To Howard Raiffa,
- Page 7 and 8:
PREFACEBetween 1981 and 1983, one o
- Page 9 and 10:
ContentsChapter 1Introduction to Ma
- Page 11 and 12:
Contents ixOverestimating Your Val
- Page 13 and 14:
CHAPTERONEIntroduction to Manageria
- Page 15 and 16:
System 1 and System 2 Thinking 3di
- Page 17 and 18:
The Bounds of Human Rationality 5T
- Page 19 and 20:
Introduction to Judgmental Heuristi
- Page 21 and 22:
2. Are couples who marry under the
- Page 23 and 24:
An Outline of Things to Come 11who
- Page 25 and 26:
CHAPTERTWOCommon BiasesPlease read
- Page 27 and 28:
TABLE 2-1Chapter ProblemsCommon Bia
- Page 29 and 30:
Common Biases 17a. Drawing a red m
- Page 31 and 32:
Biases Emanating from the Availabil
- Page 33 and 34:
Biases Emanating from the Represent
- Page 35 and 36:
three flips of a coin or getting mo
- Page 37 and 38:
samples, scientists often grossly o
- Page 39 and 40:
Biases Emanating from the Represent
- Page 41 and 42:
Biases Emanating from the Confirmat
- Page 43 and 44:
Biases Emanating from the Confirmat
- Page 45 and 46:
Biases Emanating from the Confirmat
- Page 47 and 48:
Consider the following real-life sc
- Page 49 and 50:
Biases Emanating from the Confirmat
- Page 51 and 52:
Biases Emanating from the Confirmat
- Page 53 and 54:
TABLE 2-2 Summary of the Twelve Bia
- Page 55 and 56:
TABLE 3-1Chapter ProblemsRespond to
- Page 57 and 58:
Bounded Awareness 45Problem 6. Wit
- Page 59 and 60:
After showing the video the first t
- Page 61 and 62:
Focalism and the Focusing Illusion
- Page 63 and 64:
Bounded Awareness in Strategic Sett
- Page 65 and 66:
Bounded Awareness in Strategic Sett
- Page 67 and 68:
Bounded Awareness in Strategic Sett
- Page 69 and 70:
Bounded Awareness in Strategic Sett
- Page 71 and 72:
Bounded Awareness in Auctions 59th
- Page 73 and 74:
to have overbid, or at least not by
- Page 75 and 76:
Lawsuit: You are being sued for $50
- Page 77 and 78:
Framing and the Irrationality of th
- Page 79 and 80:
We Like Certainty, Even Pseudocerta
- Page 81 and 82:
participants who were given Version
- Page 83 and 84:
What’s It Worth to You? 71straig
- Page 85 and 86:
The Value We Place on What We Own
- Page 87 and 88:
Mental Accounting 75systematically
- Page 89 and 90:
Do No Harm, the Omission Bias, and
- Page 91 and 92:
Joint Versus Separate Preference Re
- Page 93 and 94:
Joint Versus Separate Preference Re
- Page 95 and 96:
Conclusion and Integration 83Given
- Page 97 and 98:
When Emotion and Cognition Collide
- Page 99 and 100:
The Impact of Temporal DifferencesW
- Page 101 and 102:
When Emotion and Cognition Collide
- Page 103 and 104:
Positive Illusions 91players or wi
- Page 105 and 106:
Positive Illusions 93individual’
- Page 107 and 108:
Self-Serving Reasoning 95attribute
- Page 109 and 110:
Emotional Influences on Decision Ma
- Page 111 and 112:
feedback on the decision not chosen
- Page 113 and 114:
CHAPTERSIXThe Escalation of Commitm
- Page 115 and 116:
The Unilateral Escalation Paradigm
- Page 117 and 118:
The Competitive Escalation Paradigm
- Page 119 and 120:
The Competitive Escalation Paradigm
- Page 121 and 122:
reasons. The first three classes of
- Page 123 and 124:
Why Does Escalation Occur? 111In h
- Page 125 and 126:
CHAPTERSEVENFairness and Ethics inD
- Page 127 and 128:
Perceptions of Fairness 115underpe
- Page 129 and 130:
Perceptions of Fairness 117include
- Page 131 and 132:
Perceptions of Fairness 119in thes
- Page 133 and 134:
These findings are consistent with
- Page 135 and 136:
Bounded Ethicality 123within firms
- Page 137 and 138:
Bounded Ethicality 125(Epley, Caru
- Page 139 and 140:
Bounded Ethicality 127implicit des
- Page 141 and 142:
Bounded Ethicality 129people. Inst
- Page 143 and 144:
Bounded Ethicality 131The results
- Page 145 and 146:
Bounded Ethicality 133played a pec
- Page 147 and 148:
Conclusion 135the classic experime
- Page 149 and 150:
Common Investment Mistakes 137to h
- Page 151 and 152:
The Psychology of Poor Investment D
- Page 153 and 154:
The Psychology of Poor Investment D
- Page 155 and 156:
The Psychology of Poor Investment D
- Page 157 and 158:
to taxes. From a tax perspective, w
- Page 159 and 160:
Action Steps 147island have been l
- Page 161 and 162:
choose them carefully. Some annuiti
- Page 163 and 164:
CHAPTERNINEMaking Rational Decision
- Page 165 and 166:
Together, these three sets of facts
- Page 167 and 168:
CLAIMING VALUE IN NEGOTIATIONConsid
- Page 169 and 170: Creating Value in Negotiation 157I
- Page 171 and 172: Creating Value in Negotiation 159c
- Page 173 and 174: divided between negotiators. Yet, f
- Page 175 and 176: The Tools of Value Creation 163The
- Page 177 and 178: The Tools of Value Creation 165Typ
- Page 179 and 180: Summary and Critique 167approach,
- Page 181 and 182: academic programs, corporate battle
- Page 183 and 184: view the negotiation with a positiv
- Page 185 and 186: Overestimating Your Value in Negoti
- Page 187 and 188: Self-Serving Biases in Negotiation
- Page 189 and 190: Anchoring in Negotiations 177separ
- Page 191 and 192: CHAPTERELEVENImproving Decision Mak
- Page 193 and 194: Strategy 1: Use Decision-Analysis T
- Page 195 and 196: Strategy 1: Use Decision-Analysis T
- Page 197 and 198: Strategy 1: Use Decision-Analysis T
- Page 199 and 200: Strategy 2: Acquire Expertise 187c
- Page 201 and 202: STRATEGY 3: DEBIAS YOUR JUDGMENTDeb
- Page 203 and 204: virtually everyone is subject to ju
- Page 205 and 206: substantially better in the Acquiri
- Page 207 and 208: Strategy 6: Understand Biases in Ot
- Page 209 and 210: Strategy 6: Understand Biases in Ot
- Page 211 and 212: Conclusion 199the decision-making
- Page 213 and 214: References 201Badaracco, J. L., Jr
- Page 215 and 216: References 203Bernoulli, D. (1738/
- Page 217 and 218: References 205Dasgupta, N. (2004).
- Page 219: References 207Gentner, D., Loewens
- Page 223 and 224: References 211Latane, B., & Darley
- Page 225 and 226: References 213Messick, D. M., Moor
- Page 227 and 228: References 215Nosek, B. A., Banaji
- Page 229 and 230: References 217Sanfey, A. G., Rilli
- Page 231 and 232: References 219Staw, B. M., & Ross,
- Page 233 and 234: References 221Tversky, A., & Koehl
- Page 235 and 236: IndexNote: Page numbers followed by
- Page 237 and 238: Daly, H., 126Damasio, A. R., 85, 86
- Page 239 and 240: Jordan, D. J., 146Joyce, E. J., 33J
- Page 241 and 242: Rational thinkingbounds of, 4-6abou