IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/evjd6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Embracing The Intuitive-Analytical Paradox? How Intuitive And Analytical Decision-Making Drive Paradoxes In Simple And Complex Environments

Author

Listed:
  • Fellnhofer, Katharina

    (ETH Zürich)

  • Sornette, Didier

Abstract

Research proposal to tackle following research questions: To what extend is unconscious intuitive decision-making in complex and uncertain conditions more accurate than conscious analytical decision-making? Is – paradoxically – analytical thinking more successful when making simple decisions and intuitive thinking when deciding in complex environments?

Suggested Citation

  • Fellnhofer, Katharina & Sornette, Didier, 2022. "Embracing The Intuitive-Analytical Paradox? How Intuitive And Analytical Decision-Making Drive Paradoxes In Simple And Complex Environments," OSF Preprints evjd6, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:evjd6
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/evjd6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/62e44d3651748d05692860e2/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/evjd6?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. V. Yukalov & D. Sornette, 2011. "Decision theory with prospect interference and entanglement," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 283-328, March.
    2. Vyacheslav I. Yukalov & Didier Sornette, 2010. "Mathematical Structure Of Quantum Decision Theory," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(05), pages 659-698.
    3. Maroussia Favre & Amrei Wittwer & Hans Rudolf Heinimann & Vyacheslav I Yukalov & Didier Sornette, 2016. "Quantum Decision Theory in Simple Risky Choices," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-29, December.
    4. Fishburn, P. C., 1984. "SSB utility theory and decision-making under uncertainty," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 253-285, December.
    5. Stephen X. Zhang & Javier Cueto, 2017. "The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(3), pages 419-454, May.
    6. Rachel Courtland, 2018. "Bias detectives: the researchers striving to make algorithms fair," Nature, Nature, vol. 558(7710), pages 357-360, June.
    7. Silvano Martello, 2015. "Decision Making under Uncertainty in Electricity Markets," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 66(1), pages 174-174, January.
    8. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    9. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2017. "Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 1053-1070, May.
    10. McCarthy, Anne M. & Schoorman, F. David & Cooper, Arnold C., 1993. "Reinvestment decisions by entrepreneurs: Rational decision-making or escalation of commitment?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 9-24, January.
    11. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    12. Maroussia Favre & Amrei Wittwer & Hans Rudolf Heinimann & Vyacheslav I. Yukalov & Didier Sornette, 2016. "Quantum Decision Theory in Simple Risky Choices," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 16-09, Swiss Finance Institute.
    13. Burmeister, Katrin & Schade, Christian, 2007. "Are entrepreneurs' decisions more biased? An experimental investigation of the susceptibility to status quo bias," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 340-362, May.
    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. Ferro, Giuseppe M. & Kovalenko, Tatyana & Sornette, Didier, 2021. "Quantum decision theory augments rank-dependent expected utility and Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    2. Frank M. Fossen & Levent Neyse, 2024. "Entrepreneurship, Management, and Cognitive Reflection: A Preregistered Replication Study With Extensions," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 48(4), pages 1082-1109, July.
    3. Yukalov, V.I. & Yukalova, E.P. & Sornette, D., 2022. "Role of collective information in networks of quantum operating agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 598(C).
    4. Lin, Nidthida & Wilden, Ralf & Chirico, Francesco & Ghasrodashti, Elahe & DeTienne, Dawn R., 2022. "Persist or let it go: Do rational entrepreneurs make decisions rationally?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).
    5. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    6. Ismaël Rafaï & Sébastien Duchêne & Eric Guerci & Irina Basieva & Andrei Khrennikov, 2022. "The triple-store experiment: a first simultaneous test of classical and quantum probabilities in choice over menus," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 387-406, March.
    7. Cucchiarini, Veronica & Scicchitano, Sergio & Viale, Riccardo, 2024. "The Entrepreneur's Cognitive and Behavioral Journey: Understanding Heuristics and Bias under Risk and Uncertainty," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1390, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    8. Volker Thoma & Elliott White & Asha Panigrahi & Vanessa Strowger & Irina Anderson, 2015. "Good Thinking or Gut Feeling? Cognitive Reflection and Intuition in Traders, Bankers and Financial Non-Experts," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Maroussia Favre & Didier Sornette, 2015. "A Generic Model of Dyadic Social Relationships," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Sandri, Serena & Schade, Christian & Mußhoff, Oliver & Odening, Martin, 2010. "Holding on for too long? An experimental study on inertia in entrepreneurs' and non-entrepreneurs' disinvestment choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 30-44, October.
    11. Haven, Emmanuel & Khrennikova, Polina, 2018. "A quantum-probabilistic paradigm: Non-consequential reasoning and state dependence in investment choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 186-197.
    12. Luigi Mittone & Mauro Papi, 2020. "Inducing alternative-based and characteristic-based search procedures in risky choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 371-380, May.
    13. Francesco D’Acunto & Daniel Hoang & Maritta Paloviita & Michael Weber, 2023. "IQ, Expectations, and Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(5), pages 2292-2325.
    14. Dubard Barbosa, Saulo & Fayolle, Alain & Smith, Brett R., 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 528-557.
    15. V. Rattini, 2016. "Managing the Workload: an Experiment on Individual Decision Making and Performance," Working Papers wp1080, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    16. Mingfeng Tang & Hao Huang & Grace Walsh & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "The impact of entrepreneurial overconfidence on incubator effectiveness," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 416-440, February.
    17. Kraft, Priscilla S. & Günther, Christina & Kammerlander, Nadine H. & Lampe, Jan, 2022. "Overconfidence and entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of different types of overconfidence in the entrepreneurial process," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).
    18. Thomas Boyer-Kassem & Sébastien Duchêne & Eric Guerci, 2016. "Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(4), pages 479-510, November.
    19. Burnham, Terence C. & Cesarini, David & Wallace, Björn & Johannesson, Magnus & Lichtenstein, Paul, 2007. "Billiards and Brains: Cognitive Ability and Behavior in a p-Beauty Contest," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 684, Stockholm School of Economics.
    20. Eichberger, Jürgen & Pirner, Hans Jürgen, 2018. "Decision theory with a state of mind represented by an element of a Hilbert space: The Ellsberg paradox," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 131-141.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:evjd6. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.