IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v91y1997i03p553-566_21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Dynamic and Static Choice Sets on Political Decision Making: An Analysis Using the Decision Board Platform

Author

Listed:
  • Mintz, Alex
  • Geva, Nehemia
  • Redd, Steven B.
  • Carnes, Amy

Abstract

Previous studies of political decision making have used only “static” choice sets, where alternatives are “fixed” and are a priori known to the decision maker. We assess the effect of a dynamic choice set (new alternatives appear during the decision process) on strategy selection and choice in international politics. We suggest that decision makers use a mixture of decision strategies when making decisions in a two-stage process consisting of an initial screening of available alternatives, and a selection of the best one from the subset of remaining alternatives. To test the effects of dynamic and static choice sets on the decision process we introduce a computer-based “process tracer” in a study of top-ranking officers in the U.S. Air Force. The results show that (1) national security decision makers use a mixture of strategies in arriving at a decision, and (2) strategy selection and choice are significantly influenced by the structure of the choice set (static versus dynamic).

Suggested Citation

  • Mintz, Alex & Geva, Nehemia & Redd, Steven B. & Carnes, Amy, 1997. "The Effect of Dynamic and Static Choice Sets on Political Decision Making: An Analysis Using the Decision Board Platform," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(3), pages 553-566, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:91:y:1997:i:03:p:553-566_21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400210964/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nehemia Geva & James Mayhar & J. Mark Skorick, 2000. "The Cognitive Calculus of Foreign Policy Decision Making," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(4), pages 447-471, August.
    2. Eric Stern, 2004. "Contextualizing and Critiquing the Poliheuristic Theory," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 105-126, February.
    3. Alex Mintz, 2004. "Foreign Policy Decision Making in Familiar and Unfamiliar Settings," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 91-104, February.
    4. Karl DeRouen Jr. & Christopher Sprecher, 2004. "Initial Crisis Reaction and Poliheuristic Theory," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 56-68, February.
    5. Alex Mintz & Steven B. Redd & Arnold Vedlitz, 2006. "Can We Generalize from Student Experiments to the Real World in Political Science, Military Affairs, and International Relations?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 757-776, October.
    6. Blom, Tannelie and Valentina Carraro, 2014. "An information processing approach to public organizations: The case of the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 18, February.
    7. Eben J. Christensen & Steven B. Redd, 2004. "Bureaucrats Versus the Ballot Box in Foreign Policy Decision Making," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 69-90, February.
    8. Steven B. Redd, 2002. "The Influence of Advisers on Foreign Policy Decision Making," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(3), pages 335-364, June.
    9. Jonathan W. Keller & Yi Edward Yang, 2008. "Leadership Style, Decision Context, and the Poliheuristic Theory of Decision Making: An Experimental Analysis," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(5), pages 687-712, October.
    10. Ofer Mintz & Imran S. Currim & Ivan Jeliazkov, 2013. "Information Processing Pattern and Propensity to Buy: An Investigation of Online Point-of-Purchase Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 716-732, September.
    11. Steven B. Redd, 2023. "Key Concepts in the Poliheuristic Theory of Foreign Policy Decision Making: A Comparative Examination Using Systemist Theory," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-12, August.
    12. Alex Mintz, 2004. "How Do Leaders Make Decisions?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 3-13, February.
    13. Jonathan Wilkenfeld & Kathleen Young & Victor Asal & David Quinn, 2003. "Mediating International Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(3), pages 279-301, June.
    14. Currim, Imran S. & Mintz, Ofer & Siddarth, S., 2015. "Information Accessed or Information Available? The Impact on Consumer Preferences Inferred at a Durable Product E-commerce Website," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 11-25.
    15. Reich, Taly & Savary, Jennifer & Kupor, Daniella, 2021. "Evolving choice sets: The effect of dynamic (vs. static) choice sets on preferences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 147-157.
    16. Gilbride, Timothy J. & Currim, Imran S. & Mintz, Ofer & Siddarth, S., 2016. "A Model for Inferring Market Preferences from Online Retail Product Information Matrices," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(4), pages 470-485.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:91:y:1997:i:03:p:553-566_21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.