IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v31y2014i2p268-279.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Thinking Aloud While Solving a Stock‐Flow Task: Surfacing the Correlation Heuristic and Other Reasoning Patterns

Author

Listed:
  • Hubert Korzilius
  • Stephan Raaijmakers
  • Etiënne Rouwette
  • Jac Vennix

Abstract

In the literature, it is assumed that individuals, while performing stock‐flow tasks, often use a correlation heuristic, a form of pattern matching in which they think that the behavior of the stock resembles the (net) flow. To investigate this assumption and to increase our insight in the actual reasoning patterns when performing stock‐flow tasks, we conducted an experiment by using the department store task as baseline. In the treatment condition, participants performed the stock‐flow task while thinking aloud; in the control condition, they only had to write down their answers. The correlation heuristic was corroborated: participants actually did verbalize their thoughts in terms of the biggest difference between inflow and outflow at a particular point, thus expressing the correlation heuristic in words. However, other reasoning strategies that led to incorrect claims were also found. Further research is desirable to elaborate insight in the precursors of heuristic reasoning. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Hubert Korzilius & Stephan Raaijmakers & Etiënne Rouwette & Jac Vennix, 2014. "Thinking Aloud While Solving a Stock‐Flow Task: Surfacing the Correlation Heuristic and Other Reasoning Patterns," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 268-279, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:31:y:2014:i:2:p:268-279
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2196
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2196
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2196?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. Cronin, Matthew A. & Gonzalez, Cleotilde & Sterman, John D., 2009. "Why don't well-educated adults understand accumulation? A challenge to researchers, educators, and citizens," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 116-130, January.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    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. Erik O. Sterner & Tom Adawi & U. Martin Persson & Ulrika Lundqvist, 2019. "Knowing how and knowing when: unpacking public understanding of atmospheric CO2 accumulation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 49-67, May.
    2. Robinson, Stewart & Kotiadis, Kathy, 2016. "Can involving clients in simulation studies help them solve their future problems? A transfer of learning experimentAuthor-Name: Monks, Thomas," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 919-930.

    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. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    2. Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Richard C. Larson, 2018. "SD meets OR: a new synergy to address policy problems," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 327-353, January.
    3. Strohhecker, Jürgen & Leyer, Michael, 2019. "How stock-flow failure and general cognitive ability impact performance in operational dynamic control tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(3), pages 1044-1055.
    4. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & David C. Lane, 2017. "‘Behavioural System Dynamics’: A Very Tentative and Slightly Sceptical Map of the Territory," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 414-423, July.
    5. Gogi, Anastasia & Tako, Antuela A. & Robinson, Stewart, 2016. "An experimental investigation into the role of simulation models in generating insights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 931-944.
    6. 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.
    7. Strohhecker, Jürgen & Größler, Andreas, 2013. "Do personal traits influence inventory management performance?—The case of intelligence, personality, interest and knowledge," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 37-50.
    8. Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike & Strohhecker, Jürgen, 2017. "Strategy map concepts in a balanced scorecard cockpit improve performanceAuthor-Name: Hu, Bo," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 664-676.
    9. Runsten, Philip, 2017. "TEAM INTELLIGENCE: THE FOUNDATIONS OF INTELLIGENT ORGANIZATIONS - A Literature Review," SSE Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2017:2, Stockholm School of Economics.
    10. Hendijani, Rosa, 2021. "The effect of thinking style on dynamic systems performance: The mediating role of stock-flow understanding," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    11. Stephen A. Spiller & Nicholas Reinholtz & Sam J. Maglio, 2020. "Judgments Based on Stocks and Flows: Different Presentations of the Same Data Can Lead to Opposing Inferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(5), pages 2213-2231, May.
    12. Erling Moxnes & Pål I. Davidsen, 2016. "Intuitive understanding of steady-state and transient behaviors," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(2), pages 128-153, April.
    13. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    14. Carlisle, Sheena & Johansen, Aleksander & Kunc, Martin, 2016. "Strategic foresight for (coastal) urban tourism market complexity: The case of Bournemouth," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 81-95.
    15. Papachristos, George & Adamides, Emmanuel, 2016. "A retroductive systems-based methodology for socio-technical transitions research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-14.
    16. John Sterman, 2018. "System dynamics at sixty: the path forward," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 5-47, January.
    17. John Sterman, 2011. "Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 811-826, October.
    18. Arango, Santiago & Moxnes, Erling, 2012. "Commodity cycles, a function of market complexity? Extending the cobweb experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 321-334.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    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:bla:srbeha:v:31:y:2014:i:2:p:268-279. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    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.