Further reflections on the elimination of framing bias in strategic decision making

Gerard P. Hodgkinson*, A. John Maule, Nicola J. Bown, Alan D. Pearman, Keith W. Glaister

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Wright and Goodwin (2002) maintain that, in terms of experimental design and ecological validity, Hodgkinson et al. (1999) failed to demonstrate either that the framing bias is likely to be of salience in strategic decision making, or that causal cognitive mapping provides an effective means of limiting the damage accruing from this bias. In reply, we show that there is ample evidence to support both of our original claims. Moreover, using Wright and Goodwin's own data set, we demonstrate that our studies did in fact attain appropriate levels of ecological validity, and that their proposed alternative to causal cognitive mapping, a decision tree approach, is far from 'simpler.' Wright and Goodwin's approach not only fails to eliminate the framing bias-it leads to confusion.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1069-1076
Number of pages8
JournalStrategic Management Journal
Volume23
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2002

Keywords

  • Cognitive bias
  • Cognitive mapping
  • Debiasing techniques
  • Framing
  • Strategic cognition

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Further reflections on the elimination of framing bias in strategic decision making'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this