IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-1-4419-7527-0_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Uncertainty Is Psychologically Uncomfortable: A Theoretic Framework for Studying Judgments and Decision Making Under Uncertainty and Risk

In: Advances in Entrepreneurial Finance

Author

Listed:
  • William P. Neace

    (University of Hartford)

  • Kate Deer
  • Steven Michaud
  • Lauren Bolling

Abstract

A novel theoretic framework for examining judgments under uncertainty and risk is proposed based on literature examining how decision makers subjectively represent the concept of uncertainty, and how that representation influences the decision-making process. The literature suggests that “uncertainty” is conceptualized differently than is implied from the perspective of formal models such as the expected utility model. The literature further suggests that strategies used to cope with uncertainty are contingent upon how uncertainty is conceptualized, and also suggests that both cognitive and affective components of the decision influence how information is processed during decision making. The theoretic framework presented in this chapter postulates that uncertainty creates a state of psychological discomfort that motivates the decision maker to move the decision situation from a state of uncertainty toward a state of certainty in order to reduce the discomfort created by uncertainty, and ultimately, to make a decision. Given uncertainty is the main characteristic of an entrepreneurial environment, the present chapter has direct implications for both entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. Both theoretic and practical implications for future research suggested by the theoretic framework are outlined.

Suggested Citation

  • William P. Neace & Kate Deer & Steven Michaud & Lauren Bolling, 2011. "Uncertainty Is Psychologically Uncomfortable: A Theoretic Framework for Studying Judgments and Decision Making Under Uncertainty and Risk," Springer Books, in: Advances in Entrepreneurial Finance, chapter 0, pages 93-117, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-1-4419-7527-0_6
    DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-7527-0_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:spr:sprchp:978-1-4419-7527-0_6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.