Decision styles and their association with heuristic cue and decision-making rules

Abstract

This study attempts to assess preferences for processing information (decision style) in normative and descriptive decision-making tasks. This study examines the relationship of rational and experiential decision styles with heuristics and the application of decision rules. 324 undergraduate and postgraduate students were drawn purposively from a technical institute. They were administered “Rational‐Experiential Inventory”, “Applying Decision Rule” task and two versions (expert and not-expert) of an essay (as a measure of heuristics). The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression techniques. The results suggest that rational decision style (RDS) is positively related to the application of decision rules, but negatively associated with the heuristic cue. Experiential decision style (EDS) and the use of heuristic in decision-making has a significant positive relationship. The application of decision rules (integration skill) and the use of heuristics showed a significant negative correlation. The regression result indicates that both decision styles, rational and experiential, play a significant role in decision-making and impact the use of heuristics and the application of decision rules in decision-making. The findings show the utility of investigating cognitive process manifestations such as decision-making styles and the application of decision-making rules based on competencies.

Keywords:

• Rational decision style
• Experiential decision style
• Heuristics
• Decision-making Rules

1. Introduction

Decision-making is influenced by an enduring pattern of an individual which is known as decision style or thinking style. Decision style is habit-based and includes cognitive abilities such as information processing, self-evaluation, and self-regulation (Thunholm, 2004). Cognitive-experiential self-theory (Pacini & Epstein, 1999) talks about two decision styles: rational decision style (RDS) and experiential decision style (EDS). Studies have suggested RDS is more normative whereas the EDS is based on hunches and feelings. The rational style also relates to a systematic approach toward the situation. It works on a conscious level, is analytical, relatively slow, mostly verbal, and relatively effect-free with a brief evolutionary history. Experiential style is pre-conscious, automatic, rapid, holistic, and primarily nonverbal; it is also associated with affect and evolves from a long history. Several studies support the presence of these two independent systems (Epstein et al., 1996; Evans & Stanovich, 2013; Fletcher et al., 2011; Kirkpatrick & Epstein, 1992; Skarlicki & Rupp, 2010). People gather information depending on their decision style, which also includes following heuristics to reduce the cognitive load involved in a task.

Heuristics refers to an easily reachable mental shortcut or rule of thumb used in problem-solving (Ippoliti, 2015, 2018; Myers, 2010). Heuristics help people to reduce the mental efforts required for making decisions by simplifying complex problems to arrive at solutions. People use heuristics in complicated situations. The already available information and expert opinion too serve as a shortcut to reaching a solution. People use other cues to understand the situation and reach a decision. While people try to be rational in making choices, it is limited by the amount of time and information needed to make decisions. Therefore, people are forced to make decisions with limited choices and rely on shortcuts or heuristics, and the decisions are not always rational. Studies have indicated that individual differences and cognitive styles such as intelligence, big five personality factors, uncertainty, etc. influence the use of heuristics in decision-making (Bröder, 2003; Hilbig & Pohl, 2008; Hilbig et al., 2009; Hogarth & Karelaia, 2006; Newell et al., 2003). Studies also indicate that individual differences in personality traits such as statistical intuitions (Nisbett et al., 1982), and cognitive styles such as cognitive complexity, (Schroder et al., 1967), conversational skills (Slugoski & Wilson, 1998), uncertainty orientation (Sorrentino et al., 1988), and cognitive styles (Wright, 1985) lead to heuristic processing. Bruin et al. (2007) found a positive relationship between rational decision style and decision rules. However, there is dearth of studies on decision rules and decision styles.

Decision rules function as a map in the process of problem-solving and lead to inspection toward the action. They work as a framework to process the problem and include adult decision-making competence (ADMC scale). These decision rules are derived from the work of Payne et al. (1993). Decision rules work based on elimination by aspects, satisficing, lexicographic, and equal weights. People with high scores on cognitive ability tests effectively use decision rules (Bröder, 2003) and resist decision-making biases such as overconfidence and hindsight bias (Evans & Stanovich, 2013; Wolfe & Grosch, 1990).

The literature review suggests that decision style differs in processing and accordingly guides the decision-making process. The availability of resources and cognitive and individual factors play a vital role in this process. Heuristic judgment is considered a feature of the experiential style, whereas the rational style is closely associated with the application of decision rules. The various decision-making scenario led to the activation and utilization of different decision styles. Studies have used hypothetical risky scenarios or gambling tasks, or hands-on life-related behavior, and hypothetical interpersonal problem situation to assess decision-making (Chiu et al., 2018; FeldmanHall et al., 2016; Fenton-O’ Creevy et al., 2011; Panno et al., 2013; Van Kleef et al., 2004). The different kinds of decision-making may or may not differ in nature and processing. To understand the role of decision style in decision-making, the current study assessed dealt with two different kinds of decision-making tasks. First, the application of decision rules based on calculation-based problem-solving represents the normative model of decision-making; second, the use of heuristics captures real-life problem-solving representing the descriptive model of decision-making. We aimed to see the role of individual decision style in decision-making so the main objective is to examine the relationship between dominant decision style (DS) and the use of heuristic cue and the application of decision rules (DR) in decision-making. The following hypotheses were developed to examine the objectives of the study:

H₁: Rational decision style would be negatively associated with the use of heuristic cue in decision-making.

H₂: Experiential decision style would be positively associated with the use of heuristic cue in decision-making.

H₃: Rational decision style would be positively associated with the application of decision rules in decision-making.

H₄: Experiential decision style would be negatively associated with the application of decision rules in decision-making.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Three hundred and twenty-four under and postgraduate students studying at a technical institute participated in this study. The data from 24 respondents were not included due to incomplete information or incomplete answers. Thus, the actual number of participants was 300. The mean age of the sample was 24.9 years (SD 2.84). The sample consisted of 59% female students and the majority of participants were postgraduate students (59%).

3. Measures

3.1. Rational‐experiential inventory (REI‐40)

A 40‐item self‐report rational‐experiential inventory (REI‐40), a valid psychometric tool developed by Pacini and Epstein (1999), was used to measure the two decision styles, rational and experiential. The inventory includes a 5‐point response scale ranging from 1 (definitely not true of myself) to 5 (definitely true of myself). Cronbach’s alpha of REI was satisfactory (α_R = 0.94, α_E = 0.92) while the inter-item correlation was within range.

3.2. Applying decision rules (DR)

Applying decision rules (DR) was used to measure the ability to apply calculation-based rules in decision-making. DR is one of the subtests of adult decision-making competence (A-DMC) which was developed by de Bruin et al. (2007). This test includes some hypothetical situations where participants are asked to make a decision, for instance, regarding buying one DVD player based on the ratings of picture quality, sound quality, programming options, and brand reliability. Their performance is measured by the correct selection of DVD players, which indicates decision rule application while choosing the DVD player.

3.3. Heuristic cue

The heuristic model of persuasion (Chaiken, 1987) suggests that people often discount the validity of the message itself, and often made decisions based on superficial aspects of a message. These superficial aspects of the message can be characteristics of the message (e.g., length), audience characteristics, and characteristics of the communicator (e.g., expertise). Chaiken (1987) has used the term “persuasion cues” for these surface characteristics related to the message. Later, other researchers (e.g., Bodenhausen et al., 1994; Tiedens & Linton, 2001) used source of the information (i.e., the expertise of the messenger or communicator) to influence participants’ decision-making in their experiments. Tiedens and Linton (2001) have used the term “heuristic cue” for the influence of the source of information in their study. Hence, we also retain the term “heuristic cue”.

An essay on the “Education System in India” (Appendix-1) was used to measure the use of heuristics in participants. We conceptualized the use of heuristics as influenced by the heuristic cue of expertise of the essay writer. To understand this, we searched for an essay relevant to our target sample, which could be presented as a favorable argument about India’s education system. Permission was taken from the website “careeranna.com” to use the essay which was published there. This essay presents nine arguments (items) favoring the Indian education system over other countries. We added the levels of agreement and disagreement on a five-point scale after each argument. Information about the source of the essay was presented in two different versions (expert and non-expert) to the participants to understand the effect of expert opinion on the level of acceptance of the given information. In the expert version, the essay was presented as written by an expert panel consisting of academicians from different fields about the positive side of the Indian education system with a post-view of 5, 349. In the non-expert version, the same essay was presented as written by a student for a blog.

Overall internal consistency (reliability) of the nine items of the essay was very high (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.96 and .92 for the expert version and not-expert version respectively) in this study. Inter-item correlation ranged from 0.67 to 0.80 and 0.51 to 0.68 for nine items of the expert version and not-expert version, respectively.

4. Data collection procedure

Participants were selected through a purposive sampling method and the nature and aim of the study were explained to them. After obtaining informed consent, they were given general instructions regarding the study. At first, the participants were asked to express their opinion on a 5-point scale (1 = Strongly disagree; 2 = Slightly disagree; 3 = Neutral; 4 = Slightly agree; 5 = Strongly agree) about the essay. Expert and not-expert version of the essay was assigned randomly to the participants; each version was given to 150 different participants. They were later requested to provide their answers on the ADMC subscale using DR. After completing both measures, the participants were requested to fill the REI inventory. They were informed that they can either fill out the inventory at the time of the study, which would take 10 to 15 minutes or fill it in their free time as this study was a part of another study. They were encouraged to fill the inventory later and most of them did so.

5. Results

An essay was used in this study to generate the influence of heuristic cue through the source of the essay− telling the participants that the essay was written by an expert panel (expert version group) versus written by a student (not-expert version group). Significant difference observed in the essay score for both groups suggests that there was an influence of heuristic cue with Cohen’s d = 0.71 (Table 1).

Table 1. Difference in essay score for expert and not-expert versions

	Expert Version (N1 = 150)		Not-Expert Version (N2 = 150)		t	Sig.
	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Age	24.88	2.892	25.02	2.930	−0.417	0.677
Essay Score	27.03	9.447	20.87	7.709	6.194	0.000

The group which was told that the essay was written by the expert panel showed more agreement with the essay content compared to the group which was told, for the same essay, that it was written by a student. However, in the absence of any neutral group or baseline score for the essay, it cannot be said that there was no influence of the same group identity among the student participants from the essay version presented as written by a student. Hence, we made further calculations for both versions.

The study’s major objective was to examine the association of decision-making style with heuristic cue and decision-making rules. First, we computed the relationship among all the variables to get preliminary support and explore the extent to which they were associated (Table 2).

Table 2. Correlation among heuristic cue, decision styles, and application of decision rules

Essay Version		1	2	3	4
Expert	1. Essay Score	-
	2. Rational DS	−.65**	-
	3. Experiential DS	.64**	−.59**	-
	4. Decision Rules	−.69**	.73**	−.51**	-
Non-expert	1. Essay Score	-
	2. Rational DS	−.56**	-
	3. Experiential DS	.55**	−.67**	-
	4. Decision Rules	−.58**	.75**	−.69**	-

Note. DS = Decision Style. **p < .01.

The heuristic cue has a positive relationship with EDS while it was negatively correlated with RDS both significant at p < 0.01 in the expert version. In the non-expert version, the same pattern was observed and the use of heuristic cue was found positively correlated with EDS and negatively correlated with RDS, both significant at p < 0.01. Pearson’s correlations reported a positive correlation between RDS and the application of DR and a negative correlation between EDS and DR in decision-making, respectively, in the expert version. The non-expert version also showed a positive correlation between RDS and the application of DR, and a negative relationship between EDS and DR. The result also indicated a significant negative correlation between the essay score and the DR score, on both essay versions.

Regression analysis showed that both rational and experiential styles significantly contributed to the use of heuristic in expert version (R = 0.73; β = −0.43, p < 0.01; β = 0.40, p < 0.01) and not- expert version (R = 0.61; β = −0.35, p < 0.01; β = 0.32, p < 0.01; Table 3).

Table 3. Regression coefficients of decision styles on heuristic cue

Expert version (n = 150)
variables	B	β	SE
Constant	25.19***		5.78
Rational DS	−.31***	−.43***	.050
Experiential DS	.32***	.40***	.056
R^2	.53
Not-expert Version (N = 150)
Constant	23.01***		5.94
Rational DS	−.20***	−.35***	.052
Experiential DS	.19***	.32***	.052
R^2	.47

***p < .001

Further, decision (rational and experiential) styles significantly predicted the application of DR (R = 0.77; β = 0.60, p < 0.01; 0.24, p < 0.01; Table 4).

Table 4. Regression coefficients of decision styles on decision rules (N = 300)

Variables	B	β	SE
Constant	2.93 ***		.75
Rational DS	.08	.60***	.006
Experiential DS	−.033	−.24***	.007
R^2	.59

***p < .001

6. Discussion

The main objective of the present study was to examine the relationship of decision styles (RDS and EDS) with the use of heuristic and the application of DR in decision-making. The literature review led to the identification of dual information processing modes− rational and experiential decision styles. The result of the present study supports the CEST dual-process theory that the dominant decision style regulates the process of decision-making (Idrogo & Yelderman, 2019; Pacini & Epstein, 1999). Rational and experiential, both systems guide the behavior in a situation in tandem. The predominance of one system depends upon previous experiences and affective responses to the situation (Handley et al., 2000).

We hypothesized that the RDS would be negatively while EDS would be positively associated with heuristics in decision-making (H1 and H2, respectively). The less rational and more experiential tendency was associated with greater use of heuristics in judgment (Shiloh et al., 2002). Rational thinkers tend to engage in rigorous information processing and appraisal of events and utilize higher cognitive resources in decision-making (Epstein, 2003, 2014). So rational thinking demands attention to complete information about and critical analysis of the situation. In contrast, the experiential style uses experience (Shirzadifard et al., 2018) and other sources to reach a decision. Decision styles are not mutually exclusive. These styles are used in combination with decision-making (Scott & Bruce, 1995). Curşeu and Schruijer (2012) found a positive correlation between rational style and rationality in their study. Their finding further reported a negative correlation between indecisiveness and rational style.

We used two versions of an essay to highlight the influence of source of essay (heuristic cue) in decision-making. The written information in the essay was taken as already processed and passed by an expert; we assumed that this expert opinion might become base to reach to the conclusion for an individual with a tendency of EDS, which is a very distinctive feature of experiential processing. However, the correlation of decision styles was similar for both expert and non-expert essay versions with heuristic cue; the prediction values (β score and R²) of decision styles were large for expert version. It indicates higher tendency towards rational decision-making, while lesser tendency towards experiential decision-making will lead to lesser influence of heuristics; opposite of degrees in these tendencies may facilitate the influence of heuristics.

Applying DR is recognized as an integration skill among general decision-making skills (Bröder, 2000). This integration skill has been defined as an ability to combine belief and value in choosing among several options (Bavolar, 2013). We further hypothesized that RDS would be positively while EDS would be negatively associated with the application of DR in decision-making (H3 & H4, respectively). These hypotheses were accepted in our study. Rational thinking style and ability to apply DR in decision-making complement each other. Rational thinking is positively related to statistical judgment and follows norms and rules (Shiloh et al., 2002) and is activated in dealing with a mathematical problem (Brown & Bond, 2015; Sladek et al., 2010). An individual with a dominant rational thinking style effectively uses DR and norms when faced with a problem. The application of DR has been considered as an ability to inhibit the use of irrelevant or less relevant information (Del Missier et al., 2010). Studies have also associated DR with effective decision style and cognitive ability to resist decision bias (Bröder, 2003; Bruin et al., 2007). The findings of our study support the role of rational style in facilitating the application of DR in decision-making. We also observed a negative correlation between heuristic judgment and rational style in our study, which further supports the distinct nature of both styles. Regression analysis further favored the obtained result as it indicated the significant contribution of both decision styles on the use of heuristics and the application of DR. People with a dominant experiential decision style use heuristics and experiential style was negatively associated with the application of decision rules in decision-making. The processing remains similar even we manipulate the source of information. This study discussed the influence of decision style regardless of whether it is presented as an expert or layman version.

7. Limitations and conclusion

Despite the potential findings, some limitations of the present study need to be acknowledged. The essay used in this study to measure the use of heuristics was selected based on its relevance for the student sample, but it was not a standard measure. Also, the generalizability of the result could be an issue due to the specificity of the sample (student only).

Future studies could use a standardized tool or measure to assess the use of heuristics in decision-making. A standardized tool or measure would be less debatable and may add objective findings of the tendency to use heuristics in decision-making. Also, the individual difference in decision style could have been studied against different academic backgrounds, which was assessed in the present study. More diverse nature of the sample and the validated measure could have explicated other aspects of the decision-making process.

There are several other conceptualizations of decision-making. Russell and Thaler (1985) have given space to the “quasi-rational” system in their decision-making. They have asserted that “emotions frequently win” when a person must choose between decision-making based on calculations and a quasi-rational system. Rowe and Boulgarides (1992) defined decision-making style based on cognitive complexity (tolerance for ambiguity) and a person’s value orientation (either to human, social, or task concerns). Based on cognitive complexity and value orientation they have listed four decision-making styles -directive, analytical, conceptual, and behavioural. Further study is warranted to understand the interplay of emotion and (quasi) rationality in the context of rule-based, normative, and other decision-making scenarios.

Researchers have recognized the flexibility in cognitive ability and information processing style in decision-making and the crucial role of situational factors (Ayal et al., 2015). This understanding facilitates the selection of a preferred decision style and adaptive use of decision rules for professionals. Individual competencies could be further enhanced as decision-making skills. The finding of this study supports the individual differences in decision-making and different dominance of decision styles in different problem situations (i.e., descriptive- experiential-based versus rule or norm-based).

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study conform with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. This study was approved by the Institutional Research Committee.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data Availability Statement

Data included in this article are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

This research has not received any specific grant from any funding agency.

Appendix

Education System in India

Below points are written by an expert panel consists of academicians from different field about the positive side of Indian education system with post view of 5,349 at Career anna.com. Kindly read it carefully. We would like to know your concern about raised points in this essay. Let us know your agreement or disagreement on given points by ticking (✓) on given scale.

In terms of literacy, India is one of those at the top of the world rankings. In fact, Indians are known to be avid readers. According to a survey, an Indian reads an average of almost 11 hours a week. Indians are so gifted and its only in India, where 65% youngsters (less than 35 years) are living. We can see many Indians get selected worldwide in the multi national companies, creating their own fortune. They are able to perform good in their career only because of quality education provided in India.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

If you look at international education systems, they equip one with critical thinking skills and the capability of applying the knowledge. But they do not provide one with the vast knowledge base that the Indian education system does. Indian education is tougher as compared to the education imparted in foreign universities. With so much emphasis on scoring marks, Indians are forced to become fiercely competitive. It’s no surprise that 3 of the world’s most competitive exams (UPSC, JEE, and CAT) are from India.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

The teacher-student relationship in India is better than foreign nations as they have a friendly and cordial relation which helps a student to stay motivated while studying and it can be a factor that is lacking in foreign nations which can help us to develop in the field of education.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

India’s schools and colleges provide more ground-work on helping students learn the concept theoretically. This means Indians are generally of high intellect level compared to American counterparts. Right from our school-days to post graduate level, we have a variety of class tests, cycle tests, assessments, quarterly and half yearly exams, semester exams etc. This ensures that students are in constant touch with their books. This also means that Indians generally will have more scope in scoring in competitive exams like IIT, CAT, IAS, IBPS etc.and foreign based standardized tests like GRE, GMAT, SAT etc.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

Most of the primary and middle class educational systems have included a subject called moral science while this is something that is not taught in foreign universities. This subject teaches students about the basic morals and ethics. Earlier, it was believed that ethics are something that cannot be taught, but our education system has made a first step in that direction. Moreover, many cultural fests and music concerts are encouraged by Indian schools and colleges. Focusing on fine-arts activates the left-side of the brain that helps create brain balance.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

In Indian educational system, we have tests that conducted every month to find out how much have we learned. Many students hate it, but there is a good side. Tests help us understand chapters in depth, memorize them and retrieve it when needed. In other words, we develop a habit of learning by our self, we learn how to priorities topics and the way to remember them. We do this for many years constantly and by the end of our school life, we are master at grasping concepts quickly and effectively. Students go through many exams in their learning years. It teaches the students to analyse their strengths and weaknesses consistently.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

The best part of Indian Education system was and is in its “Rote Learning”- Kanthastha, as it was in ancient India. This simulates the mind, body, soul. improves concentration and bursts the stress as well as invokes inner sense. So, “rote learning” also has a positive side. In CBSE system, with continuous evaluation and understanding of theory concept, student is bound to do well in life. The annual system is a boon for slow and average learners. The understanding of diverse subjects and equal weightage to all is another excellent way to give horizontal knowledge. There is amalgamation of logic and creativity, thereby, giving equal importance to left and right brains. It is such a holistic educational system.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

We are taught to be, if not multi, at least bilingual. In most of the schools in India, english is a compulsory language and the regional language is also taught with equal importance. We learn to be secular with the help of Indian educational system. Studying at a school where we have students with different religions, we slowly learn how to respect other religions as well.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree

The Indian education system has the correct mix of academic freedom and rigor. Any more freedom would potentially confuse and reduce the academic capabilities of the students and any less would make them a machine.

• 1- Strongly Disagree

• 2- Strongly Disagree

• 3- Neutral

• 4- Strongly Agree

• 5- Strongly Agree