212 ReferencesLoewenstein, G., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. PsychologicalBulletin, 127, 267–286.Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (1999). Analogical encoding facilitates knowledgetransfer in negotiation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6(4), 586–597.Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Gentner, D. (2003). Analogical learning in negotiation teams:Comparing cases promotes learning and transfer. Academy of Management Learning and Education,2(2), 119–127.Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7,560–572.Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Preston, E. (1984). Considering the opposite: A corrective strategyfor social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1243.Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109.Lowenthal, D. J. (1996). What voters care about: How electoral context influences issue saliencein campaigns. Carnegie Mellon University: Unpublished doctoral dissertation.Mack, A. (2003). Inattentional blindness: Looking without seeing. Current Directions in PsychologicalScience, 12(5), 180–184.Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.Macrae,C.N.,&Bodenhausen,G.V.(2001).Social cognition: Categorical person perception.British Journal of Psychology, 92(1), 239–255.Madrian, B. C., & Shea, D. F. (2001). The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation andsavings behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1149–1187.Malhotra, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2007). Negotiating genius. New York: Bantam.Malkiel, B. G. (2003). A random walk down Wall Street (8th ed.). New York: Norton.Malkiel, B. G., & Saha, A. (2005). Hedge funds: Risk and return. Financial Analyst Journal, 61(6),80–88.Malmendier, U., & Tate, G. (2005). CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. Journal ofFinance, 60,6.Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and realityof diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6, 31–55.March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.Massey, C., & Wu, G. (2005). Detecting regime shifts: The causes of over- and underreaction.Management Science, 51(6), 932–947.McClure, S. M., Laibson, D., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Separate neural systemsvalue immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306(5695), 503–507.McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test, discriminatorybehavior, and explicit measures of racial attitides. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 37(5), 435–442.McGraw, A. P., Mellers, B. A., & Ritov, I. (2004). The affective costs of overconfidence. Journal ofBehavioral Decision Making, 17(4), 281–295.Medvec, V. H., Madey, S. F., & Gilovich, T. (1995). When less is more: Counterfactual thinkingand satisfaction among Olympic medalists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4),603–610.Meier, B. (2005, November 10). Guidant issues data on faulty heart devices. New York Times,p. C5.Messick, D. M. (1991). Equality as a decision heuristic. In B. A. Mellers (Ed.), Psychologicalissues in distributive justice. New York: Cambidge University Press.Messick, D. M., & Bazerman, M. H. (1996). Ethical leadership and the psychology of decisionmaking. Sloan Management Review, 37(2), 9–22.
References 213Messick, D. M., Moore, D. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1997). Ultimatum bargaining with a group:Underestimating the importance of the decision rule. Organizational Behavior and HumanDecision Processes, 69(2), 87–101.Messick, D. M., & Sentis, K. P. (1983). Fairness, preference, and fairness biases. In D. M.Messick & K. S. Cook (Eds.), Equity theory: Psychological and sociological perspectives(pp. 61–94). New York: Praeger.Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 67,371–378.Milkman, K., Rogers, T., & Bazerman, M. H. (2007). Film rentals and procrastination: A study ofintertemporal reversals in preferences and intrapersonal conflict. Boston. http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/07-099.pdf.Milkman, K. L., Beshears, J., Rogers, T., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). Mental accounting andsmall windfalls: Evidence from an online grocer. Boston: Harvard Business School workingpaper.Mitroff, S. R., Simons, D. J., & Franconeri, S. L. (2002). The Siren Song of implicit change detection.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 798–815.Mokdad, A. H., Marks, J. S., Stroup, D. F., & Gerberding, J. L. (2004). Actual causes of death inthe United States. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291, (1239–1245).Moore, C. M., & Egeth, H. (1997). Perception without attention: Evidence of grouping under conditionsof inattention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23(2), 339–352.Moore, D. A. (2004a). Myopic prediction, self-destructive secrecy, and the unexpected benefits ofrevealing final deadlines in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, 94(2), 125–139.Moore, D. A. (2004b). The unexpected benefits of final deadlines in negotiation. Journal of ExperimentalSocial Psychology, 40(1), 121–127.Moore, D. A. (2005). Myopic biases in strategic social prediction: Why deadlines put everyoneunder more pressure than everyone else. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(5),668–679.Moore, D. A., & Cain, D. M. (2007). Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why peopleunderestimate (and overestimate) the competition. Organizational Behavior & Human DecisionProcesses, 103, 197–213.Moore, D. A.,Cain, D. M.,Loewenstein, G., & Bazerman, M. H. (Eds.). (2005). Conflicts of interest:Challenges and solutions in law, medicine, and organizational settings. New York:Cambridge University Press.Moore, D. A., & Healy, P. J. (2007). The trouble with overconfidence. Pittsburgh: Tepper WorkingPaper 2007-E17.Moore, D. A., & Healy, P. J. (2008). The trouble with overconfidence. Psychological Review,115(2), 502–517.Moore, D. A., & Kim, T. G. (2003). Myopic social prediction and the solo comparison effect.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(6), 1121–1135.Moore, D. A., Kurtzberg, T. R., Fox, C. R., & Bazerman, M. H. (1999). Positive illusions andforecasting errors in mutual fund investment decisions. Organizational Behavior and HumanDecision Processes, 79(2), 95–114.Moore, D. A., Oesch, J. M., & Zietsma, C. (2007). What competition? Myopic self-focus in marketentry decisions. Organization Science, 18(3), 440–454.Moore, D. A., & Small, D. A. (2007). Error and bias in comparative social judgment: On being bothbetter and worse than we think we are. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6),972–989.
- 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 and 220: References 207Gentner, D., Loewens
- Page 221 and 222: References 209Pension design and s
- Page 223: References 211Latane, B., & Darley
- 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