Information Order and Outcome Framing: An Assessment of Judgment Bias in a Naturalistic Decision-Making Context

Findings that decision makers can come to different conclusions depending on the order in which they receive information have been termed the "information order bias." When trained, experienced individuals exhibit similar behaviors; however, it has been argued that this result is not a bias, but rather, a patternmatching process. This study provides a critical examination of this claim. It also assesses both experts' susceptibility to an outcome framing bias and the effects of varying task loads on judgment. Using a simulation of state-of-the-art ship defensive systems operated by experienced, active-duty U.S. Navy officers, we found no evidence of a framing bias, while task load had a minor, but systematic effect. The order in which information was received had a significant impact, with the effect being consistent with a judgment bias. Nonetheless, we note that patternmatching processes, similar to those that produce inferential and reconstructive effects on memory, could also explain our results. Actual or potential applications of this research include decision support system interfaces or training programs that might be developed to reduce judgment bias.

[1]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Understanding Human Error and Aiding Human Diagnostic Behaviour in Nuclear Power Plants , 1981 .

[2]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Adaptive Nature of Human Categorization , 1991 .

[3]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Establishing the Boundaries of a Paradigm for Decision-Making Research , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[4]  Elliot E. Entin,et al.  Sequential processing of information from multiple sources , 1989, Conference Proceedings., IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[5]  F. Moore Cognitive development and the acquisition of language , 1973 .

[6]  John G. Casali,et al.  A Validated Rating Scale for Global Mental Workload Measurement Applications , 1983 .

[7]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Special Section Preface , 1996 .

[8]  E. Rosch ON THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF PERCEPTUAL AND SEMANTIC CATEGORIES1 , 1973 .

[9]  F. Bartlett,et al.  Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology , 1932 .

[10]  Paul E. Lehner,et al.  Expert decision-making in evolving situations , 1989, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[11]  William B. Rouse,et al.  Human Detection and Diagnosis of System Failures , 1981 .

[12]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[13]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  SCRIPTS, PLANS, GOALS, AND UNDERSTANDING , 1988 .

[14]  L. Ross,et al.  Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. , 1981 .

[15]  G. Klein,et al.  Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods , 1993 .

[16]  Leonard Adelman,et al.  Research with Patriot Air Defense Officers: Examining Information Order Effects , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[17]  M. Tolcott,et al.  Examining the Effect of Information Order on Expert Judgment , 1993 .

[18]  Charles Wilson,et al.  Decision Making in Complex Environments , 1994 .

[19]  Beverly G Knapp,et al.  Insights on Information Absorption and Transmission Rates in C2I Settings , 1985 .

[20]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[21]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[22]  Robert L. Mason,et al.  Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 2003 .

[23]  Robert H. Ashton,et al.  Evidence-responsiveness in professional judgment: Effects of positive versus negative evidence and presentation mode , 1990 .