CAREER: Study of Redundant Deliberation in High-Stakes, High-Uncertainty Decision Making Using the Least-Worst Uncertainty Choice Inventory for Emergency Responses

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Recent research in the field of decision-making has identified that, when faced with high-risk, high-uncertainty decisions, individuals can suffer from redundant deliberation and fail to commit to the right (or wrong) action in the required amount of time. Redundant deliberation is a unique psychological process within decision-making under uncertainty, that has received less theoretical attention because it pertains to the absence, or delay, or a decision being made. To date a wealth or naturalistic research (i.e., research in the field) has observed the presence of redundant deliberation in emergency service responses, and real-life cases of decision-making under pressure have shown the presence, and indeed damage, of redundant deliberation (e.g., Grenfell Fire, intervention in the Syrian civil war). Despite this, no scientific research has been able to explore the psychological process that underpins the causes of, and individual differences in redundant deliberation. The overall goal of the proposed research is to develop a new measure of decision-making in high-stakes, high-uncertainty situations that is designed for members of the emergency services and police force in order to develop scientific theory on the underlying psychological process of redundant deliberation. The main feature of this proposal is the validation and implementation of a newly designed research methodology; the Least-Worst Uncertain Choice Inventory for Emergency Responses. To date, this Inventory has been piloted on over 350 practitioners including members of the United States Armed Forces, members of the United Kingdom Police Force, senior members of the Singapore Crises Response team, and even members of the High Value Detainee Interrogation group. The results of these studies have shown that the Inventory can be used to explore the effect of individual differences (such as need for closure, self-reported maximization, goal orientation) on decision-making tendencies and redundant deliberation; that it can be used to model the neurological processes of redundant deliberation and that it can even be used to test emerging theories of redundant deliberation (e.g., the “theory of colliding sacred values”). Thus, by furthering our understanding of the psychological process of redundant deliberation through the continued and expanded use of the Least-Worst Uncertain Choice Inventory for Emergency Responses, this CAREER grant can have a significant positive impact on the ability of people to respond to time-critical situations and avoid delaying important actions.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.