IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/125404.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Fasolo, Barbara
  • Heard, Claire
  • Scopelliti, Irene

Abstract

The detrimental influence of cognitive biases on decision-making and organizational performance is well established in management research. However, less attention has been given to bias mitigation interventions for improving organizational decisions. Drawing from the judgment and decision-making (JDM) literature, this paper offers a clear conceptualization of two approaches that mitigate bias via distinct cognitive mechanisms—debiasing and choice architecture—and presents a comprehensive integrative review of interventions tested experimentally within each approach. Observing a lack of comparative studies, we propose a novel framework that lays the foundation for future empirical research in bias mitigation. This framework identifies decision, organizational, and individual-level factors that are proposed to moderate the effectiveness of bias mitigation approaches across different contexts and can guide organizations in selecting the most suitable approach. By bridging JDM and management research, we offer a comprehensive research agenda and guidelines to select the most suitable evidence-based approach for improving decision making processes and, ultimately, organizational performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Fasolo, Barbara & Heard, Claire & Scopelliti, Irene, 2024. "Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125404, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:125404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/125404/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Indranil Goswami & Oleg Urminsky, 2016. "When should the ask be a nudge? The Effect of Default Amounts on Charitable Donations," Natural Field Experiments 00659, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Todd Rogers, 2017. "On the misplaced politics of behavioural policy interventions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(7), pages 1-7, July.
    3. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2004. "Save More Tomorrow (TM): Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 164-187, February.
    4. Goda, Gopi Shah & Levy, Matthew R. & Manchester, Colleen Flaherty & Sojourner, Aaron & Tasoff, Joshua, 2020. "Who is a passive saver under opt-in and auto-enrollment?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 301-321.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:1:p:25-46 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Guoli Chen & Craig Crossland & Shuqing Luo, 2015. "Making the same mistake all over again: CEO overconfidence and corporate resistance to corrective feedback," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1513-1535, October.
    7. Yi Tang & Cuili Qian & Guoli Chen & Rui Shen, 2015. "How CEO hubris affects corporate social (ir)responsibility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(9), pages 1338-1357, September.
    8. Jordan Tong & Daniel Feiler & Richard Larrick, 2018. "A Behavioral Remedy for the Censorship Bias," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 27(4), pages 624-643, April.
    9. Hal E. Hershfield & Stephen Shu & Shlomo Benartzi, 2020. "Temporal Reframing and Participation in a Savings Program: A Field Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(6), pages 1039-1051, November.
    10. Cassar, Gavin & Craig, Justin, 2009. "An investigation of hindsight bias in nascent venture activity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 149-164, March.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:136-149 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Per O. Seglen, 1992. "The skewness of science," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(9), pages 628-638, October.
    13. Abhinav Bhattacharyya & Wen Jin & Caroline Floch & Daniel G. Chatman & Joan L. Walker, 2019. "Nudging people towards more sustainable residential choice decisions: an intervention based on focalism and visualization," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 373-393, April.
    14. Irene Scopelliti & Carey K. Morewedge & Erin McCormick & H. Lauren Min & Sophie Lebrecht & Karim S. Kassam, 2015. "Bias Blind Spot: Structure, Measurement, and Consequences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2468-2486, October.
    15. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
    16. Ahn, Heinz & Vazquez Novoa, Nadia, 2016. "The decoy effect in relative performance evaluation and the debiasing role of DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 959-967.
    17. Oliver Thomas, 2018. "Two decades of cognitive bias research in entrepreneurship: What do we know and where do we go from here?," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 107-143, April.
    18. Felix Ebeling & Sebastian Lotz, 2015. "Domestic uptake of green energy promoted by opt-out tariffs," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(9), pages 868-871, September.
    19. Benjamin Enke & Florian Zimmermann, 2019. "Correlation Neglect in Belief Formation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 313-332.
    20. Daylian M. Cain & Don A. Moore & Uriel Haran, 2015. "Making sense of overconfidence in market entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 1-18, January.
    21. Joyce C. He & Sonia K. Kang & Nicola Lacetera, 2021. "Opt-out choice framing attenuates gender differences in the decision to compete in the laboratory and in the field," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118(42), pages 2108337118-, October.
    22. Comerford, David A., 2011. "Attenuating focalism in affective forecasts of the commuting experience: Implications for economic decisions and policy making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 691-699.
    23. Iris Bohnet & Alexandra van Geen & Max Bazerman, 2016. "When Performance Trumps Gender Bias: Joint vs. Separate Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1225-1234, May.
    24. Jung, Janice Y. & Mellers, Barbara A., 2016. "American attitudes toward nudges," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 62-74, January.
    25. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:62-74 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Yanping Tu & Dilip Soman, 2014. "The Categorization of Time and Its Impact on Task Initiation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(3), pages 810-822.
    27. T.K. Das & Bing‐Sheng Teng, 1999. "Cognitive Biases and Strategic Decision Processes: An Integrative Perspective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 757-778, November.
    28. Frydman, Cary & Rangel, Antonio, 2014. "Debiasing the disposition effect by reducing the saliency of information about a stock's purchase price," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 541-552.
    29. Fasolo, Barbara & Misuraca, Raffaella & Reutskaja, Elena, 2024. "Choose as much as you wish: freedom cues in the marketplace help consumers feel more satisfied with what they choose and improve customer experience," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118780, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    30. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:202-213 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Natalie S. Glance & Tad Hogg & Bernardo A. Huberman, 1997. "Training and Turnover in the Evolution of Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 84-96, February.
    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. Bruns, Hendrik & Perino, Grischa, 2023. "The role of autonomy and reactance for nudging — Experimentally comparing defaults to recommendations and mandates," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    2. Stevo Pavićević & Thomas Keil, 2021. "The role of procedural rationality in debiasing acquisition decisions of overconfident CEOs," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(9), pages 1696-1715, September.
    3. Christian Schumacher & Steffen Keck & Wenjie Tang, 2020. "Biased interpretation of performance feedback: The role of CEO overconfidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1139-1165, June.
    4. Joon Mahn Lee & Jung Chul Park & Guoli Chen, 2023. "A cognitive perspective on real options investment: CEO overconfidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 1084-1110, April.
    5. David H. Weng & Yasuhiro Yamakawa, 2023. "I believe I can fly: how target venture CEO overconfidence affects acquisition completion," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 127-151, June.
    6. Briscese, Guglielmo, 2019. "Generous by default: A field experiment on designing defaults that align with past behaviour on charitable giving," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    7. Lemken, Dominic, 2020. "When do defaults stick and when are they ethical? Taxonomy, sytematic review and design recommendations," DARE Discussion Papers 2005, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    8. Fellner-Röhling, Gerlinde & Hromek, Kristijan & Kleinknecht, Janina & Ludwig, Sandra, 2023. "How to counteract biased self-assessments? An experimental investigation of reactions to social information," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1-25.
    9. Pindard-Lejarraga, Maud & Lejarraga, José, 2024. "Information source and entrepreneurial performance expectations: Experience-based versus description-based opportunity evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    10. Hendrik Bruns & Grischa Perino, 2021. "Point at, nudge, or push private provision of a public good?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 996-1007, July.
    11. Lemken, Dominic, 2020. "When do defaults stick and when are they ethical? - taxonomy, systematic review and design recommendations," Key Food Choices and Climate Change Project 307568, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    12. Anne Chwolka & Matthias G. Raith, 2023. "Overconfidence as a driver of entrepreneurial market entry decisions: a critical appraisal," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 985-1016, April.
    13. Alempaki, Despoina & Isoni, Andrea & Read, Daniel, 2023. "Tainted nudge," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    14. Tikotsky, Ariel & Pe'er, Eyal & Feldman, Yuval, 2020. "Which nudges do businesses like? Managers’ attitudes towards nudges directed at their business or at their customers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 43-51.
    15. Schüssler, Katharina, 2018. "The Influence of Overconfidence and Competition Neglect On Entry Into Competition," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 87, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    16. Kausel, Edgar E. & Reyes, Tomas & Larach, Francisco & Chacon, Alvaro & Enei, Gonzalo, 2024. "Does enhancing the vividness in connection with the future self increase savings behavior? A field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Biru, Ashenafi & Filatotchev, Igor & Bruton, Garry & Gilbert, David, 2023. "CEOs’ regulatory focus and firm internationalization: The moderating effects of CEO overconfidence, narcissism and career horizon," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(3).
    18. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    19. Banerjee, Ritwik & Gupta, Nabanita Datta & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Feedback spillovers across tasks, self-confidence and competitiveness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 127-170.
    20. Damon Clark & David Gill & Victoria Prowse & Mark Rush, 2020. "Using Goals to Motivate College Students: Theory and Evidence From Field Experiments," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 648-663, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cognitive biases; bias migration; organizational decision-making; debiasing; choice architecture; dual interventions; training; decision-making process; managerial cognition; judgment and decision-making;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J50 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ehl:lserod:125404. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.