An official website of the United States government
Objective In this study, we extend the impact of mindfulness to the concept of least-worst decision-making. Least-worst decisions involve high-uncertainty and require the individual to choose between a number of potentially negative courses of action. Research is increasingly exploring least-worst decisions, and real-world events (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) show the need for individuals to overcome uncertainty and commit to a least-worst course of action. From sports to business, researchers are increasingly showing that “being mindful” has a range of positive performance-related benefits. We hypothesized that mindfulness would improve least-worst decision-making because it would increase self-reflection and value identification. However, we also hypothesized that trait maximization (the tendency to attempt to choose the “best” course of action) would negatively interact with mindfulness. Methods Three hundred and ninety-eight participants were recruited using Amazon MTurk and exposed to a brief mindfulness intervention or a control intervention (listening to an audiobook). After this intervention, participants completed the Least-Worst Uncertain Choice Inventory for Emergency Responders (LUCIFER). Results As hypothesized, mindfulness increased decision-making speed and approach-tendencies. Conversely, for high-maximizers, increased mindfulness caused a slowing of the decision-making process and led to more avoidant choices. Conclusions This study shows the potential positive and negative consequences of mindfulness for least-worst decision-making, emphasizing the critical importance of individual differences when considering both the effect of mindfulness and interventions aimed at improving decision-making.
more »
« less
‘Let's be careful out there’: Maximization and core values predict action time in police decision making
Abstract This study tests the hypothesis that individual differences in trait maximization as well as in core personal values impact decision-making in dynamic and high-risk situations. 420 student-candidates at a Spanish police College (64.8 % male; 18 to 25 years) completed an online questionnaire that included maximization measures and core personal values. They then responded to three written vignettes that required dichotomous decisions (act vs. wait) under conditions of uncertainty. Multilevel modelling revealed that higher scores in maximization predicted a greater tendency to choose the action option later, but no differences were found in difficulty or perceived confidence. The tendency to wait was significantly higher among those who had wait-favouring core values; likewise, it was lower among those who had action-favouring core values. This study confirms the role of the trait maximization in the timeliness of decision-making, and illustrates the relationship between certain identified values, and decision making.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1945108
- PAR ID:
- 10487327
- Publisher / Repository:
- Personality and Individual Differences
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Personality and Individual Differences
- Volume:
- 215
- Issue:
- C
- ISSN:
- 0191-8869
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 112398
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Maximization Decision-making Policing Sacred values
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Cooke, Steven J (Ed.)Values and motivations can shape natural resource management decision-making as individuals set conservation goals based on diverse, unique backgrounds, histories, and experiences. Recent literature points to the need to understand, evaluate, and articulate practitioner values to make explicit how experiences shape their work. Our research responds to calls to explore a diverse range of values and motivations among conservation practitioners. We used a qualitative approach grounded in phenomenology to advance an in-depth understanding of how conservation and stewardship practitioners experience, acknowledge, and make sense of conservation decision-making in Maine, USA. We interviewed 21 conservation and stewardship practitioners. Our results indicate the presence of complex value systems, including strong biospheric, altruistic, eudaimonic, as well as egoistic values. These values interact and intersect with motivations for participants’ careers in conservation in unique ways, driving participant actions and decision-making. Within Maine specifically, our results highlight the many areas for convergence of broad values among seemingly diverse groups that can inform opportunities for collaboration. Participants expressed various pathways to careers in conservation, where their work enables them to make a meaningful contribution to the environment and society. However in situations where personal and organizational values are misaligned, the role of organizational transparency, employee empowerment, and agency are key. Our results have implications for conservation groups seeking to achieve high employee satisfaction, as well as researchers, policymakers, and practitioners who hope to inspire individuals to take on conservation careers to create sustainable and transformative action for the future. Fostering early experiences in place, including interactions with the non-human world and local community, are important for influencing and reinforcing values and motivations for conservation action.more » « less
-
Rational numbers (i.e., fractions, percentages, decimals, and whole-number frequencies) are notoriously difficult mathematical constructs. Yet correctly interpreting rational numbers is imperative for understanding health statistics, such as gauging the likelihood of side effects from a medication. Several pernicious biases affect health decision-making involving rational numbers. In our novel developmental framework, the natural-number bias—a tendency to misapply knowledge about natural numbers to all numbers—is the mechanism underlying other biases that shape health decision-making. Natural-number bias occurs when people automatically process natural-number magnitudes and disregard ratio magnitudes. Math-cognition researchers have identified individual differences and environmental factors underlying natural-number bias and devised ways to teach people how to avoid these biases. Although effective interventions from other areas of research can help adults evaluate numerical health information, they circumvent the core issue: people’s penchant to automatically process natural-number magnitudes and disregard ratio magnitudes. We describe the origins of natural-number bias and how researchers may harness the bias to improve rational-number understanding and ameliorate innumeracy in real-world contexts, including health. We recommend modifications to formal math education to help children learn the connections among natural and rational numbers. We also call on researchers to consider individual differences people bring to health decision-making contexts and how measures from math cognition might identify those who would benefit most from support when interpreting health statistics. Investigating innumeracy with an interdisciplinary lens could advance understanding of innumeracy in theoretically meaningful and practical ways.more » « less
-
Achieving sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage has been hindered in many areas by vaccine hesitancy. Many studies based on large survey samples have characterized vaccine refusal, but there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore hesitant adoption: the middle-ground between vaccine acceptance and refusal, and how individuals may move across this continuum depending on their lived experience. For this paper, we use the narratives of 25 adults living in off-road, predominately Alaska Native communities to describe the complex decision-making processes undertaken by ‘hesitant adopters’, defined in our study as those who completed their initial COVID-19 series despite reporting hesitancy. Interviewees' stories help illustrate how hesitant adopters' decision-making processes involved making sense of information through interactions with trusted individuals, lived experiences, observations, emotions, and personal motivations. For the majority of these hesitant adopters' (n = 20, 80%) interpersonal interactions were key in helping to make the decision to get vaccinated. Over half of the interviewees (n = 14, 56%) described how conversations with individuals they trusted, including healthcare providers, family, friends, and interactions through their professional network made them feel safe. One third of the hesitant adopters (n = 7, 28%) attributed their decision to get vaccinated based on the influence of Alaska Native Elders including their knowledge, personal experiences, as well as being motivated by the desire to protect them. Independent research was also important to about a quarter of hesitant adopters (n = 6, 24%), and for these interviewees it was the process of gathering information on their own and learning from others, especially healthcare providers who could answer their questions and alleviate their concerns. This paper illustrates the temporality of vaccine decision-making: vaccine acceptance for those who are hesitant may be an ongoing process that is influenced by personal experience, relationships, and context.more » « less
-
Background: The health belief model suggests that individuals' beliefs affect behaviors associated with health. This study examined whether Ohioans' pre-existing medical health diagnoses affected their belief about personal health risk and their compliance with social distancing during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior research examining physical and mental diagnoses and social distancing compliance is nearly nonexistent. We examined whether physical and mental health diagnoses influenced individuals' beliefs that their health is at risk and their adherence with social distancing guidelines. Methods: The study used longitudinal cohort data from the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) (n = 790), which surveyed Ohioans prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Dependent variables included belief that an individual's own health was at risk and social distancing compliance. Independent variables included physical and mental health diagnoses, pandemic-related factors (fear of COVID-19, political beliefs about the pandemic, friends social distance, family social distance, COVID-19 exposure), and sociodemographic variables (age, gender, race/ethnicity, educational level). Results: Individuals who had a pre-existing physical health diagnosis were more likely to believe that their personal health was at risk during the pandemic but were not more likely to comply with social distancing guidelines. In contrast, individuals who had a pre-existing mental health diagnosis were more compliant with social distancing guidelines but were not more likely to believe their personal health was at risk. Individuals who expressed greater fear of COVID-19 believed their health is more at risk than those who expressed lower levels of fear. Conclusion: Health considerations are important to account for in assessments of responses to the pandemic, beliefs about personal health risk, and social distancing behavior. Additional research is needed to understand the divergence in the findings regarding physical health, beliefs about personal health risk, and social distancing compliance. Further, research is needed to understand how mental health issues impact decision-making related to social distancing compliance.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112398
