IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v48y2004i1p3-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Leaders Make Decisions?

Author

Listed:
  • Alex Mintz

    (Department of Political Science, Texas A&M University, United Nations Studies, Yale University)

Abstract

Poliheuristic theory (PH) bridges the gap between cognitive and rational theories of decision making. PH postulates a two-stage decision process. During the first stage, the set of possible options is reduced by applying a “noncompensatory principle†to eliminate any alternative with an unacceptable return on a critical, typically political, decision dimension. Once the choice set has been reduced to alternatives that are acceptable to the decision maker, the process moves to a second stage, during which the decision maker uses more analytic processing in an attempt to minimize risks and maximize benefits. In this article, the author applies poliheuristic theory to individual, sequential, and interactive decision settings. Subsequent articles in this issue offer theoretical extensions and multiple tests of the theory using multiple methods (formal, statistical, experimental).

Suggested Citation

  • Alex Mintz, 2004. "How Do Leaders Make Decisions?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(1), pages 3-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:48:y:2004:i:1:p:3-13
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002703261056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002703261056
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002703261056?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Ostrom, Charles W. & Job, Brian L., 1986. "The President and the Political Use of Force," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 541-566, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Oeindrila Dube & S.P. Harish, 2017. "Queens," NBER Working Papers 23337, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Kyle Haynes, 2017. "Diversionary conflict: Demonizing enemies or demonstrating competence?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(4), pages 337-358, July.
    9. Paul K. Huth, 1998. "Major Power Intervention in International Crises, 1918-1988," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(6), pages 744-770, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Susan Hannah Allen, 2008. "The Domestic Political Costs of Economic Sanctions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(6), pages 916-944, December.
    12. Robin F. Marra & Charles W. Ostrom Jr. & Dennis M. Simon, 1990. "Foreign Policy and Presidential Popularity," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(4), pages 588-623, December.
    13. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell & Brandon C. Prins, 2004. "Rivalry and Diversionary Uses of Force," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(6), pages 937-961, December.
    14. Benjamin Fordham, 1998. "Partisanship, Macroeconomic Policy, and U.S. Uses of Force, 1949-1994," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(4), pages 418-439, August.
    15. CHRISTOPHER SPRECHER & KARL DeROUEN Jr., 2002. "Israeli Military Actions and Internalization-externalization Processes," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(2), pages 244-259, April.
    16. Haar Roberta & Krebs Lutz F., 2015. "Choosing to Intervene: US Domestic Politics and Moral Imperatives," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(4), pages 497-505, December.
    17. 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.
    18. T. Clifton Morgan & Kenneth N. Bickers, 1992. "Domestic Discontent and the External Use of Force," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(1), pages 25-52, March.
    19. Benjamin O. Fordham, 2004. "A Very Sharp Sword," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(5), pages 632-656, October.
    20. Dennis M. Foster, 2006. "State Power, Linkage Mechanisms, and Diversion against Nonrivals," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 23(1), pages 1-21, February.

    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:sae:jocore:v:48:y:2004:i:1:p:3-13. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.