IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v113y2010i2p102-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Focus induced tunnel vision in managerial judgment and decision making: The peril and the antidote

Author

Listed:
  • Posavac, Steven S.
  • Kardes, Frank R.
  • Josko Brakus, J.

Abstract

Managers often must assess singular strategic options. Four studies of such assessments demonstrate a tunnel vision effect: Focal managerial options often are favored in an evidentially unjustifiable manner. Study 1 concerns new product development, and demonstrates that a prototype that has become focal tends to be judged overly favorably, and is chosen for launch with unwarranted enthusiasm. Study 2 shows that this tunnel vision effect generalizes to judgments and decisions about general strategy. Study 3 focuses on the information search patterns underlying the effect, and Study 4 replicates the tunnel vision effect among experienced executives, and demonstrates the utility of a debiasing procedure. Data in all of the studies implicate selective processing as the driver of the tunnel vision effect, and further understanding of how selective processing affects choice. Several alternative operationalizations of the empirically tested debiasing procedure are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Posavac, Steven S. & Kardes, Frank R. & Josko Brakus, J., 2010. "Focus induced tunnel vision in managerial judgment and decision making: The peril and the antidote," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 102-111, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:113:y:2010:i:2:p:102-111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(10)00057-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar & Kramer, Thomas & Young, Maia J., 2004. "Effect propensity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 156-174, November.
    2. Fox, Craig R. & Levav, Jonathan, 2000. "Familiarity Bias and Belief Reversal in Relative Likelihood Judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 268-292, July.
    3. Meyvis, Tom & Janiszewski, Chris, 2002. "Consumers' Beliefs about Product Benefits: The Effect of Obviously Irrelevant Product Information," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(4), pages 618-635, March.
    4. Novemsky, Nathan & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2004. "What makes negotiators happy? The differential effects of internal and external social comparisons on negotiator satisfaction," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 186-197, November.
    5. Steven Posavac & Frank Kardes & David Sanbonmatsu & Gavan Fitzsimons, 2005. "Blissful Insularity: When Brands are Judged in Isolation from Competitors," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 87-97, April.
    6. Hsee, Christopher K & Leclerc, France, 1998. "Will Products Look More Attractive When Presented Separately or Together?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(2), pages 175-186, September.
    7. Kurt A. Carlson & Margaret G. Meloy & J. Edward Russo, 2006. "Leader-Driven Primacy: Using Attribute Order to Affect Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(4), pages 513-518, March.
    8. McKenzie, Craig R. M., 1997. "Underweighting Alternatives and Overconfidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 141-160, August.
    9. Dhar, Ravi & Nowlis, Stephen M & Sherman, Steven J, 1999. "Comparison Effects on Preference Construction," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 26(3), pages 293-306, December.
    10. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    11. Van Wallendael, Lori Robinson, 1989. "The quest for limits on noncomplementarity in opinion revision," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 385-405, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mitchell, Rebecca & Boyle, Brendan & Nicholas, Stephen & Maitland, Elizabeth & Zhao, Shuming, 2016. "Boundary conditions of a curvilinear relationship between decision comprehensiveness and performance: The role of functional and national diversity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2801-2811.
    2. Cegarra-Navarro, Juan-Gabriel & Wensley, Anthony & Batistic, Sasa & Evans, Max & Para, Clara Cubillas, 2021. "Minimizing the effects of defensive routines on knowledge hiding though unlearning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 58-68.
    3. Clintin Davis-Stober, 2011. "A Geometric Analysis of When Fixed Weighting Schemes Will Outperform Ordinary Least Squares," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 650-669, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gould, Stephen J. & Kramer, Thomas, 2009. ""What's it Worth to Me?" Three interpretive studies of the relative roles of task-oriented and reflexive processes in separate versus joint value construction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 840-858, December.
    2. Posavac, Steven S. & Josko Brakus, J. & Cronley, Maria L. & Jain, Shailendra Pratap, 2009. "On assuaging positive bias in environmental value elicitation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 482-489, June.
    3. Steven Posavac & Frank Kardes & David Sanbonmatsu & Gavan Fitzsimons, 2005. "Blissful Insularity: When Brands are Judged in Isolation from Competitors," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 87-97, April.
    4. Mischkowski, Dorothee & Glöckner, Andreas & Lewisch, Peter, 2021. "Information search, coherence effects, and their interplay in legal decision making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    5. Nolte, Sven & Schneider, Judith C., 2018. "How price path characteristics shape investment behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 33-59.
    6. Darren W Dahl & Eileen Fischer & Gita V Johar & Vicki G Morwitz, 2017. "Making Sense from (Apparent) Senselessness: The JCR Lens," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(4), pages 719-723.
    7. Bond, Samuel D. & Carlson, Kurt A. & Meloy, Margaret G. & Russo, J. Edward & Tanner, Robin J., 2007. "Information distortion in the evaluation of a single option," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 240-254, March.
    8. Lunn, Pete & Bohacek, Marek & McGowan, Feidhlim, 2016. "The Surplus Identification Task and Limits to Multi-Attribute Consumer Choice," Papers WP536, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    9. Lunn, Pete & Bohacek, Marek & Somerville, Jason & Ni Choisdealbha, Aine & McGowan, Feidhlim, 2016. "PRICE Lab: An Investigation of Consumers’ Capabilities with Complex Products," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number BKMNEXT306.
    10. Kurt A. Carlson & Samuel D. Bond, 2006. "Improving Preference Assessment: Limiting the Effect of Context Through Pre-exposure to Attribute Levels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 410-421, March.
    11. Gierl, Heribert & Stiegelmayr, Karin, 2012. "Erzeugt nicht-diagnostische Information einen Reihenfolge-Effekt im Fall der attributweisen Informationspräsentation?," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(2), pages 127-152.
    12. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    13. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    14. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    15. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    16. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    17. Prokudina, Elena & Renneboog, Luc & Tobler, Philippe, 2015. "Does Confidence Predict Out-of-Domain Effort?," Discussion Paper 2015-055, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Amos Schurr & Yaakov Kareev & Judith Avrahami & Ilana Ritov, 2012. "Taking the Broad Perspective: Risky Choices in Repeated Proficiency Tasks," Discussion Paper Series dp621, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    19. Noussair, C.N. & Tucker, S. & Xu, Yilong, 2014. "A Future Market Reduces Bubbles but Allows Greater Profit for More Sophisticated Traders," Other publications TiSEM 43ded173-9eee-48a4-8a15-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Moore, Don A., 1999. "Order Effects in Preference Judgments: Evidence for Context Dependence in the Generation of Preferences, ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 146-165, May.

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:113:y:2010:i:2:p:102-111. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.