IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v66y2020i5p2213-2231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Judgments Based on Stocks and Flows: Different Presentations of the Same Data Can Lead to Opposing Inferences

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen A. Spiller

    (Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90095;)

  • Nicholas Reinholtz

    (Leeds School of Business, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309;)

  • Sam J. Maglio

    (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6, Canada; University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, Ontario M1C 1A4, Canada)

Abstract

Time-series data—measurements of a quantity over time—can be presented as stocks (the quantity at each point in time) or flows (the change in quantity from one point in time to the next). In a series of six experiments, we find that the choice of presenting data as stocks or flows can have a consequential impact on judgments. The same data can lead to positive or negative assessments when presented as stocks versus flows and can engender optimistic or pessimistic forecasts for the future. For example, when employment data from 2007 to 2013 are shown as flows (jobs created or lost), President Obama’s impact on the economy during his first year in office is viewed positively, whereas when the same data are shown as stocks (total jobs), his impact is viewed negatively. The results highlight a challenge that accompanies the growing reliance on data and analytics for decision making within organizations: seemingly benign choices—such as that between two informationally equivalent data presentations—can substantively impact how data are interpreted and used, even though the underlying information is the same.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:5:p:2213-2231
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2019.3284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3284
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3284?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. Raghubir, Priya & Srivastava, Joydeep, 2002. "Effect of Face Value on Product Valuation in Foreign Currencies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(3), pages 335-347, December.
    2. John D. Sterman & Linda Booth Sweeney, 2002. "Cloudy skies: assessing public understanding of global warming," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 18(2), pages 207-240, June.
    3. Andreassen, Paul B., 1988. "Explaining the price-volume relationship: The difference between price changes and changing prices," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 371-389, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Mark Paich & John D. Sterman, 1993. "Boom, Bust, and Failures to Learn in Experimental Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(12), pages 1439-1458, December.
    6. John D. Sterman, 1987. "Testing Behavioral Simulation Models by Direct Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(12), pages 1572-1592, December.
    7. Sterman, John & Booth Sweeney, Linda, 2002. "Cloudy Skies: Assessing Public Understanding of Global Warming," Working papers 4361-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    8. 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.
    9. 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. Wang, Le & Luo, Xin (Robert) & Li, Han, 2022. "Envy or conformity? An empirical investigation of peer influence on the purchase of non-functional items in mobile free-to-play games," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 308-324.

    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. 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.
    2. Jürgen Strohhecker & Andreas Größler, 2012. "Implementing Sustainable Business Strategies," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 547-570, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Varun Dutt & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2012. "Human control of climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 497-518, April.
    5. 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).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    9. Thompson, James P. & Howick, Susan & Belton, Valerie, 2016. "Critical Learning Incidents in system dynamics modelling engagements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 945-958.
    10. Radboud J. Duintjer Tebbens & Kimberly M. Thompson, 2009. "Priority Shifting and the Dynamics of Managing Eradicable Infectious Diseases," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(4), pages 650-663, April.
    11. Arango, Santiago & Castañeda, Jaime A. & Larsen, Erik R., 2013. "Mothballing in power markets: An experimental study," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 125-134.
    12. Rosa Hendijani, 2021. "Analytical thinking, Little's Law understanding, and stock‐flow performance: two empirical studies," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(2-3), pages 99-125, April.
    13. Christian Erik Kampmann & John D. Sterman, 2014. "Do markets mitigate misperceptions of feedback?," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(3), pages 123-160, July.
    14. 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.
    15. John Sterman, 2018. "System dynamics at sixty: the path forward," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 5-47, January.
    16. John Sterman, 2011. "Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 811-826, October.
    17. Liang Qi & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2015. "Mathematical knowledge is related to understanding stocks and flows: results from two nations," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 31(3), pages 97-114, July.
    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. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    20. Gibson, Faison P., 2000. "Feedback Delays: How Can Decision Makers Learn Not to Buy a New Car Every Time the Garage Is Empty?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 141-166, September.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:5:p:2213-2231. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.