IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mth/ber888/v3y2013i1p299-321.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic Decision Making: Individual Attributes And Behavior in a Challenge Dice Game

Author

Listed:
  • Rebecca M. Guidice
  • Darryl A. Seale
  • Daniel McAllister

Abstract

Adopting both experimental and individual differences approaches we study dynamic decision making using the Challenge Dice Game. Experimentally, this computer task offered subjects immediate feedback and the opportunity to modify their strategic behavior over time. Subjects were found to behave more aggressively than equilibrium predictions and failed to approach optimal play with experience. From the individual difference perspective, characteristics thought to explain behavior and performance in uncertain and risky decision contexts were compared to observed behavior and performance with mixed results. We conclude that existing psychological scales are imperfect and not necessarily strong predictors of behavior and performance in dynamic decision tasks.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebecca M. Guidice & Darryl A. Seale & Daniel McAllister, 2013. "Dynamic Decision Making: Individual Attributes And Behavior in a Challenge Dice Game," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 3(1), pages 299-321, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:mth:ber888:v:3:y:2013:i:1:p:299-321
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ber/article/view/3207/2947
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ber/article/view/3207
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    3. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    4. Levin, Irwin P. & Gaeth, Gary J. & Schreiber, Judy & Lauriola, Marco, 2002. "A New Look at Framing Effects: Distribution of Effect Sizes, Individual Differences, and Independence of Types of Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 411-429, 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. Rachel Croson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 335-351, July.
    2. K. Skylar Powell, 2017. "Understanding ‘Misfits’: Aspirations and Systematic Deviations from Firm-Specific Optimal Multinationality," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 529-544, August.
    3. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    4. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    5. Li Chen & A. Gürhan Kök & Jordan D. Tong, 2013. "The Effect of Payment Schemes on Inventory Decisions: The Role of Mental Accounting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 436-451, September.
    6. Ancarani, A. & Di Mauro, C. & D'Urso, D., 2013. "A human experiment on inventory decisions under supply uncertainty," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 61-73.
    7. Leyer, Michael & Schneider, Sabrina, 2021. "Decision augmentation and automation with artificial intelligence: Threat or opportunity for managers?," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(5), pages 711-724.
    8. Kuperman, Ranan, 2011. "Coping with Conflict:A Dynamic Decision Making Perspective," NEPS Working Papers 3/2011, Network of European Peace Scientists.
    9. James Fan & Joaquín Gómez-Miñambres, 2020. "Nonbinding Goals in Teams: A Real Effort Coordination Experiment," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1026-1044, September.
    10. Prasad Padmanabhan & Wenqing Zhang & Chia-Hsing Huang, 2013. "Mitigating the Impact of Managerial Anchoring: The Case for Management by Committee for Major Corporate Financial Decisions," Multinational Finance Journal, Multinational Finance Journal, vol. 17(3-4), pages 341-369, September.
    11. Yuan, Xuchuan & Nishant, Rohit, 2021. "Understanding the complex relationship between R&D investment and firm growth: A chaos perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 666-678.
    12. Harvey, Michael & Griffith, David & Kiessling, Tim & Moeller, Miriam, 2011. "A multi-level model of global decision-making: Developing a composite global frame-of-reference," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 177-184, April.
    13. Pastore, Erica & Alfieri, Arianna & Zotteri, Giulio, 2019. "An empirical investigation on the antecedents of the bullwhip effect: Evidence from the spare parts industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 121-133.
    14. Berry, D. & Naim, M. M., 1996. "Quantifying the relative improvements of redesign strategies in a P.C. supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 181-196, December.
    15. Towill, Denis R. & Zhou, Li & Disney, Stephen M., 2007. "Reducing the bullwhip effect: Looking through the appropriate lens," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1-2), pages 444-453, July.
    16. Plante, Charles & Lassoued, Rim & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2017. "The Social Determinants of Cognitive Bias: The Effects of Low Capability on Decision Making in a Framing Experiment," SocArXiv u62cx, Center for Open Science.
    17. Oliva, Rogelio, 2003. "Model calibration as a testing strategy for system dynamics models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(3), pages 552-568, December.
    18. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    19. Ma, Yungao & Wang, Nengmin & He, Zhengwen & Lu, Jizhou & Liang, Huigang, 2015. "Analysis of the bullwhip effect in two parallel supply chains with interacting price-sensitive demands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(3), pages 815-825.
    20. Rich, Karl M. & Ross, R. Brent & Baker, A. Derek & Negassa, Asfaw, 2011. "Quantifying value chain analysis in the context of livestock systems in developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 214-222, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dynamic decision making; Risk; Behavior; Performance; Individual differences; Experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:mth:ber888:v:3:y:2013:i:1:p:299-321. 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: Technical Support Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ber .

    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.