Pre- and Post-Decision Editing in a Risky and Complex Task Environment

Duquesne University, Pittsburgh PA

Investigators

Abstract

This study focuses on the processes involved in the editing (memory) of past decisions. Our goal is to contribute to decision theory while expanding our collective understanding of how complex auditing decisions are made. The study builds on a well-known body of preceding work, notably Festinger's cognitive dissonance reduction theory, Fischhoff's hindsight bias, and Svenson's differentiation and consolidation theory. Festinger, for example, has shown that decision makers actively reevaluate the" worth" of the rejected alternative after a decision has been made--frequently to reduce the risk of post-decision regret. We focus on both pre- and post-decision attribute isolation and editing: on how expert and novice auditors make sense of complex and risky judgment/decision tasks, and on how feedback (or lack thereof) influences their memory of earlier supportive and counter-indicative signal ratings. Both pre- and post-decision sense-making (editing) processes are closely linked to both effective and biased learning. We hypothesize that there are significant differences in the type of data--qualitative vs. quantitative and positive vs. negative-- that the professionals and novices attend to. We also hypothesize that novices are more likely to behave in accordance with established decision theory than their professional counterparts; that domain knowledge gives rise to an interesting and largely unexplored set of mitigating factors.