IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v114y2025ics2214804324001666.html

Decision-making styles and cognitive biases: Experimental results from a Korean sample

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Bum Seok
  • Kim, Woosub
  • Min, Jae H.

Abstract

This study aims to identify which decision-making style is more prone to judgment errors induced by various heuristics by categorizing subjects into five decision-making styles: rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant, and spontaneous. Specifically, we measure the frequency of judgment errors using the three heuristics of representativeness, availability, and anchoring and adjustment for each decision-making style by presenting 343 participants with several decision tasks. Logistic regression analysis is employed to discern the distinctive characteristics among the five decision-making styles. The results show that cognitive biases caused by using the heuristics differ based on individuals’ decision-making styles, suggesting that these styles are associated with their respective judgment error types. The experimental results of this study can support individuals in making more rational decisions by helping them understand which cognitive biases are likely to occur based on their specific decision-making style.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Bum Seok & Kim, Woosub & Min, Jae H., 2025. "Decision-making styles and cognitive biases: Experimental results from a Korean sample," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:114:y:2025:i:c:s2214804324001666
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2024.102329
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324001666
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2024.102329?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John C. Henderson & Paul C. Nutt, 1980. "The Influence of Decision Style on Decision Making Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 371-386, April.
    2. Nour El Shamy & Khaled Hassanein, 2018. "The Impact of Age and Cognitive Style on E-Commerce Decisions: The Role of Cognitive Bias Susceptibility," Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organization, in: Fred D. Davis & René Riedl & Jan vom Brocke & Pierre-Majorique Léger & Adriane B. Randolph (ed.), Information Systems and Neuroscience, pages 73-83, Springer.
    3. Bavoľár, Jozef & Orosová, Oľga, 2015. "Decision-making styles and their associations with decision-making competencies and mental health," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 115-122, January.
    4. Jozef Bavoľár & Oľga Orosová, 2015. "Decision-making styles and their associations with decision-making competencies and mental health," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(1), pages 115-122, January.
    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. Tomasz Wachowicz & Ewa Roszkowska & Marzena Filipowicz-Chomko, 2023. "Identifying decision-making style: Do REI-20 and GDMS measure the same?," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 50(4), pages 415-437, December.
    2. O'Keefe, Robert M., 2016. "Experimental behavioural research in operational research: What we know and what we might come to know," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 899-907.
    3. L A Franco & M Meadows, 2007. "Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(12), pages 1621-1629, December.
    4. Steul, Martina, 2006. "Does the framing of investment portfolios influence risk-taking behavior? Some experimental results," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 557-570, August.
    5. Shen, Huayu & Xiong, Hao & Zheng, Shaofeng & Hou, Fei, 2021. "Chief executive officer (CEO)’s rural origin and internal control quality," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 441-452.
    6. Céline Bérard & L.M., Cloutier & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print hal-02128255, HAL.
    7. Céline Bérard, 2013. "Les démarches participatives en matière de politiques publiques : le cas de la propriété intellectuelle des innovations biotechnologiques," Post-Print halshs-00987945, HAL.
    8. Shipley, Margaret F. & Johnson, Madeline, 2009. "A fuzzy approach for selecting project membership to achieve cognitive style goals," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 918-928, February.
    9. Hafkamp, Wim & Nijkamp, Peter, 1986. "Integrated economic-environmental-energy policy and conflict analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 551-576.
    10. Rossignoli, Francesca & Bozzolan, Saverio & Lionzo, Andrea, 2025. "Financial expert CEOs: Evidence from purchase price allocation," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Butler, Stephen A. & Ghosh, Dipankar, 2015. "Individual differences in managerial accounting judgments and decision making," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 33-45.
    12. Sebastian Kruse & David Bendig & Malte Brettel, 2023. "How Does CEO Decision Style Influence Firm Performance? The Mediating Role of Speed and Innovativeness in New Product Development," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1205-1235, July.
    13. Thomas J. Housel & Waymond Rodgers, 1994. "A Multi‐Stage Model of Decision Bias: Implications for Expert Systems," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(3), pages 165-186, August.
    14. Gerrit H. van Bruggen & Ale Smidts & Berend Wierenga, 1998. "Improving Decision Making by Means of a Marketing Decision Support System," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 645-658, May.
    15. Shujing Liang & Yuwei Zou, 2018. "Validation of Adult Decision-Making Competence in Chinese college students," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(4), pages 393-400, July.
    16. Tariq Mahadeen & Kostas Galanakis & Elpida Samara & Pavlos Kilintzis, 2021. "Heuristics and Evidences Decision (HeED) Making: a Case Study in a Systemic Model for Transforming Decision Making from Heuristics-Based to Evidenced-Based," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1668-1693, December.
    17. John W. Boudreau, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Organizational Behavior, Strategy, Performance, and Design in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1463-1476, November.
    18. Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi & Alexander Brem & Mohammad Shahabinezhad, 2018. "Does Thinking Style Make a Difference in Environmental Perception and Orientation? Evidence from Entrepreneurs in Post-Sanction Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    19. Fuming Jiang & Subramaniam Ananthram & Jizhong Li, 2018. "Global Mindset and Entry Mode Decisions: Moderating Roles of Managers’ Decision-Making Style and Managerial Experience," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 413-447, June.
    20. Renata M. Heilman & Petko Kusev & Mircea Miclea & Joseph Teal & Rose Martin & Alessia Passanisi & Ugo Pace, 2021. "Are Impulsive Decisions Always Irrational? An Experimental Investigation of Impulsive Decisions in the Domains of Gains and Losses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-14, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:soceco:v:114:y:2025:i:c:s2214804324001666. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    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.