Group 5 - Class C - Critical Review

Capable of mastering and implementing the
topic on Accounting Decision-Making

Models and Cognitive Bias
Group 4
Rafael Komang Eric Juanaristo
Benedicta Prisilia Christi
Erika Nurannisa Oktaviani
Yellow Prinsis Dayani
Strong Point
This study explores the effects of four cognitive biases in the estimation, judgment, and decision-making
tasks of crisis responders. Three of them include cognitive biases that have the most influence on human
information processing namely, framing effects, containment bias, confirmation bias. The fourth bias i.e.,
blind spot bias addresses how aware decision makers are about their own biases, which is an important
prerequisite for effectively mitigating the effects of negative bias, i.e. debiasing. This study discusses the
four selected biases and develops the appropriate hypotheses in more detail. The development of the
hypotheses used in this research include the crisis framework hypothesis, the blind spot crisis bias
hypothesis, the crisis confirmation hypothesis, and the crisis anchoring hypothesis. reports three online
survey experiments with scenario assignments to measure the effects of these three biases on crisis
decisions. This research focuses on three groups: 1) the general crisis-affected public, because they
constitute the largest population during a crisis, 2) government and non-profit workers, because they are
responsible for the main crisis response efforts and often collaborate in response, and 3) experts crisis, as
their advice to policy makers and practitioners is critical during crisis response efforts.
Strong Point
In a combined three survey trials, a total of 531 respondents participated, 460 crisis-affected people, 50
government and non-profit workers, and 21 crisis experts. In the sample of people affected by the crisis the mean
age was 35.85 (SD = 11.02), and 138 women and 271 men participated. In a sample of government and nonprofit
employees, the average years of work experience was 16.06 (SD = 12.44), and 16 nonprofit employees and 34
government employees participated. The average years of work experience in the sample of crisis experts was
10.69 (SD = 7.3) and participants represented all types of organizations in crisis response, including local and
international organizations, UN agencies, research and academia, and the private sector.
The results for the crisis framing hypothesis, namely Participants show more risk-seeking behavior in a loss
condition and risk-averse behavior in a profit condition. For the results for the survey experiment's crisis bias
blind-spot hypothesis, participants judged themselves to be less biased than others when making decisions. and
results for the Outcomes for the crisis anchoring hypothesis In all three survey experiments, participants' estimates
of available crisis resources were affected by anchoring bias, Participants in the low anchorage condition provided
significantly lower estimates than participants in the high anchorage condition. The crisis management literature
has emphasized the potential negative influence of cognitive biases on crisis decision making. However, empirical
evidence is lacking, particularly regarding the different bias effects between different groups of crisis stakeholders.
Strong Point
This research also finds support for this assumption. Overall, crisis experts were
the least biased in our experiment. They show no confirmation bias and may even
prefer more inconclusive information than information that supports their initial
decision. This suggests that experts choose to challenge their initial decisions and
deliberately seek information that disproves their initial assumptions. This may be
explained by the strong professional backgrounds of our expert participants
(average number of years of crisis work experience over ten years.). The
technology vs privacy dilemma used as a scenario in our confirmation bias task is
a well-known crisis problem [81]. Our results suggest that crisis experts are more
critical of these issues and try to evaluate their informed choices more carefully.
Point To Be Improved
The researchers acknowledge that many types of bias can potentially affect crisis
response. Debiasing interventions need to be investigated, especially for crisis
information systems. We discuss the implications of these findings on IS crisis
design principles that can be further evaluated by future research on an
experimental basis as a starting point. What interventions work to reduce bias for
different decision makers in different contexts has the potential to generate
substantial benefits for all stakeholders in a crisis-affected society. These
experimental findings should be compared with future observations during crisis
response exercises or real-world crisis response operations. The limitation with
this approach is that intervening in real-life events will be subject to multiple
influences, which will limit generalizability.

Group 5 - Class C - Critical Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Group 5 - Class C - Critical Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Group 5 - Class C - Critical Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Capable of mastering and implementing the

topic on Accounting Decision-Making

You might also like