The Affect Heuristic - Revision history

Mwschmidt at 08:26, 16 March 2021

2021-03-16T08:26:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:26, 16 March 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Created by Marie-Louise Wolfsberg Schmidt, February 2021		Created by Marie-Louise Wolfsberg Schmidt, February 2021
	[[Category:''Project Managment'']] [[Category:''Human ~~Behavior~~'']]		[[Category:''Project Managment'']] [[Category:''Human Behaviour'']]

	'''Abstract'''<br />		'''Abstract'''<br />

Mwschmidt at 10:34, 9 March 2021

2021-03-09T10:34:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:34, 9 March 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Created by Marie-Louise Wolfsberg Schmidt, February 2021		Created by Marie-Louise Wolfsberg Schmidt, February 2021
			[[Category:''Project Managment'']] [[Category:''Human Behavior'']]

	'''Abstract'''<br />		'''Abstract'''<br />

Mwschmidt: /* Annotated Bibliography */

2021-02-28T18:57:05Z

Annotated Bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:57, 28 February 2021
Line 83:		Line 83:
	'''Project Management Institute, Inc. (2017): Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (6th Edition). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI).'''<br />		'''Project Management Institute, Inc. (2017): Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (6th Edition). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI).'''<br />
	The book provides a framework for how to execute a project, program, or portfolio in theory. These methods and the use of standards should be incorporated in project management practice, mainly to avoid a situation where the affect heuristic is the optimal way of making a decision. However, it fails to describe how anything that involves people is, to some degree, unpredictable. Though it is possible to be prepared with a robust but flexible plan, unanticipated events will happen. It also fails to describe how to handle a situation where the project manager must think fast since it assumes that there will always be time for going through a process of requesting changes, which might not always be the case.		The book provides a framework for how to execute a project, program, or portfolio in theory. These methods and the use of standards should be incorporated in project management practice, mainly to avoid a situation where the affect heuristic is the optimal way of making a decision. However, it fails to describe how anything that involves people is, to some degree, unpredictable. Though it is possible to be prepared with a robust but flexible plan, unanticipated events will happen. It also fails to describe how to handle a situation where the project manager must think fast since it assumes that there will always be time for going through a process of requesting changes, which might not always be the case.

			=== Suggestion for further reading ===
			As mentioned, people tend to rely more on the affect heuristic under time pressure - or when they have to "think fast". This concept is described and analyzed by Daniel Kahneman in his book "Thinking, Fast and Slow" from 2011. The mental judgment heuristics are especially part of Thinking System 1, where the brain has to process and judge automatically. Because of time and word limits, this article has not discussed this literature. But to get a better understanding of how the brain works in fast thinking situations, it is recommended to look into this literature.

	== References ==		== References ==
	<references />		<references />

Mwschmidt: /* Background */

2021-02-28T18:51:42Z

Background

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:51, 28 February 2021
Line 18:		Line 18:
	<blockquote>“… affect means the specific quality of “goodness” or “badness” (i) experienced as a feeling state (with or without consciousness) and (ii) demarcating a positive or negative quality of a stimulus.” <ref name ="slovic2007"/>. </blockquote>		<blockquote>“… affect means the specific quality of “goodness” or “badness” (i) experienced as a feeling state (with or without consciousness) and (ii) demarcating a positive or negative quality of a stimulus.” <ref name ="slovic2007"/>. </blockquote>

	The basic idea is that people tag memories or situations with varying degrees of affect (emotions they are experiencing in that moment). These tags can be used as short-cuts in decision-making. The tags are described as somatic markers by Seymour Epstein, who discussed this concept in 1994 <ref name="epstein">Epstein, S. (1994): Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious. the American Psychological Association. </ref>. When a situation triggers a memory, the somatic marker is used to anticipate if the outcome will be positive or negative and thereby add arguments to the decision-making process <ref name ="slovic2007"/>. Much like the availability heuristic and the confirmation heuristic <ref name ="bazerman"/>, the affect heuristic is a mental rule of thumb, which the brain uses to make decisions. Affective reactions to stimuli are often the first reaction<ref name ="slovic2007"/> and mostly happens unconsciously. This means that we usually have made an assumption or decision about a situation before we even know it. In some cases, this method can be easier and more efficient than going through a whole decision framework <ref name="slovic2007"/>. Understanding how the heuristic works can be valuable in situations where time is limited.		The basic idea is that people tag memories or situations with varying degrees of affect (emotions they are experiencing in that moment). These tags can be used as short-cuts in decision-making. The tags are described as somatic markers by Seymour Epstein, who discussed this concept in 1994 <ref name="epstein">Epstein, S. (1994): Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious. the American Psychological Association. </ref>. When a situation triggers a memory, the somatic marker is used to anticipate if the outcome will be positive or negative and thereby add arguments to the decision-making process <ref name ="slovic2007"/>. Much like the availability heuristic and the confirmation heuristic <ref name ="bazerman"/>, the affect heuristic is a mental rule of thumb, which the brain uses to make decisions. Affective reactions to stimuli are often the first reaction<ref name ="slovic2007"/> and mostly happens unconsciously. This means that we usually have made an assumption or decision about a situation before we even know it. In some cases, this method can be easier and more efficient than going through a whole decision framework <ref name="slovic2007"/>. Understanding how the heuristic works can be valuable in situations where time is limited. A study mentioned in Slovic's paper showed, that people were more likely to rely on the heuristic under time pressure<ref name="slovic2007"/>. This can be both beneficial and have consequences if it is relied on carelessly.

	It can be difficult to grasp exactly what the affect heuristic is, but think of it as an estimator. An example could be someone who is looking to buy a new car. Here the estimator includes price, color, and size. But, if the decision-maker has had a bad experience with the car brand, or the salesman in the store, this can also be part of the estimation of whether he/she wants to buy the car or not. The decision-maker uses the positive or negative feeling about the previous experience to estimate whether the car is worth buying. I		It can be difficult to grasp exactly what the affect heuristic is, but think of it as an estimator. An example could be someone who is looking to buy a new car. Here the estimator includes price, color, and size. But, if the decision-maker has had a bad experience with the car brand, or the salesman in the store, this can also be part of the estimation of whether he/she wants to buy the car or not. The decision-maker uses the positive or negative feeling about the previous experience to estimate whether the car is worth buying. I

Mwschmidt: /* Limitations of the Affect Heuristic */

2021-02-28T18:43:02Z

Limitations of the Affect Heuristic

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:43, 28 February 2021
Line 63:		Line 63:
	In many cases, decision-making in a group setting comes with lots of advantages. The group can share critical information and discuss their experience. However, a study from 1985 showed that group discussion “… tended to increase the recall of information that supported the initially most popular (and ultimately winning) candidate even though this information was primarily shared before the discussion.” <ref name="pooling">Stasser, G. & Titus, W. (1985): Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making:		In many cases, decision-making in a group setting comes with lots of advantages. The group can share critical information and discuss their experience. However, a study from 1985 showed that group discussion “… tended to increase the recall of information that supported the initially most popular (and ultimately winning) candidate even though this information was primarily shared before the discussion.” <ref name="pooling">Stasser, G. & Titus, W. (1985): Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making:
	Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. In Journal of Pereonality and Social Psychology (1985). the American Psychological Association, Inc.</ref>. In short, it means that groups of people prefer to discuss already shared information instead of new knowledge. This will also limit the information needed to make the right decision based on the affect heuristic. A good project manager will provide a procedure, which promotes the sharing of new knowledge since it is his/her job to have a complete overview.		Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. In Journal of Pereonality and Social Psychology (1985). the American Psychological Association, Inc.</ref>. In short, it means that groups of people prefer to discuss already shared information instead of new knowledge. This will also limit the information needed to make the right decision based on the affect heuristic. A good project manager will provide a procedure, which promotes the sharing of new knowledge since it is his/her job to have a complete overview.


	=== Bounded rationality ===		=== Bounded rationality ===

Mwschmidt: /* Limitations of the Affect Heuristic */

2021-02-28T18:24:24Z

Limitations of the Affect Heuristic

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:24, 28 February 2021
Line 54:		Line 54:
	The affect heuristic is, as mentioned, something that often happens unconsciously in our minds. Affect comes from how the person perceives situations from different perspectives and contexts. This means that there are several ways it can be manipulated, which limits the effectiveness depending on the affect heuristic in decision-making. Bounded awareness and bounded rationality are some of the limitations of the affect heuristic, but Slovic's paper also found that the mind perception of risk differs from reality.		The affect heuristic is, as mentioned, something that often happens unconsciously in our minds. Affect comes from how the person perceives situations from different perspectives and contexts. This means that there are several ways it can be manipulated, which limits the effectiveness depending on the affect heuristic in decision-making. Bounded awareness and bounded rationality are some of the limitations of the affect heuristic, but Slovic's paper also found that the mind perception of risk differs from reality.

			=== Bounded Awareness ===
	The human brain receives an enormous amount of information every single day. To avoid information overload, the brain must filter through all this information. This happens unconsciously and depends on the person’s energy level, health, interests, and many other factors what information gets stored<ref name ="bazerman"/>. Since the information includes the somatic markers, the affect heuristic is already very limited by our own ability to store information efficiently. The following describes various tendencies that lie within the bounded awareness term<ref name ="bazerman"/>.		The human brain receives an enormous amount of information every single day. To avoid information overload, the brain must filter through all this information. This happens unconsciously and depends on the person’s energy level, health, interests, and many other factors what information gets stored<ref name ="bazerman"/>. Since the information includes the somatic markers, the affect heuristic is already very limited by our own ability to store information efficiently. The following describes various tendencies that lie within the bounded awareness term<ref name ="bazerman"/>.

Line 63:		Line 64:
	Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. In Journal of Pereonality and Social Psychology (1985). the American Psychological Association, Inc.</ref>. In short, it means that groups of people prefer to discuss already shared information instead of new knowledge. This will also limit the information needed to make the right decision based on the affect heuristic. A good project manager will provide a procedure, which promotes the sharing of new knowledge since it is his/her job to have a complete overview.		Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. In Journal of Pereonality and Social Psychology (1985). the American Psychological Association, Inc.</ref>. In short, it means that groups of people prefer to discuss already shared information instead of new knowledge. This will also limit the information needed to make the right decision based on the affect heuristic. A good project manager will provide a procedure, which promotes the sharing of new knowledge since it is his/her job to have a complete overview.


			=== Bounded rationality ===
	The lack of information keeps us from evaluating all possible outcomes and simplifying the decision, which leads to making a choice that will satisfy the stakeholders but might not optimize the project outcome. This is called bounded rationality and is an example of the lazy human brain. It confirms that we tend to deviate from rationality if we have not been given a decision-making framework, which encourages the project team to gather the necessary information and explore where information is lacking. The more relevant information that has been stored, the more precise is the somatic marker. More precise somatic markers provide better impression formation, judgment, and decision making<ref name ="slovic2007"/>.		The lack of information keeps us from evaluating all possible outcomes and simplifying the decision, which leads to making a choice that will satisfy the stakeholders but might not optimize the project outcome. This is called bounded rationality and is an example of the lazy human brain. It confirms that we tend to deviate from rationality if we have not been given a decision-making framework, which encourages the project team to gather the necessary information and explore where information is lacking. The more relevant information that has been stored, the more precise is the somatic marker. More precise somatic markers provide better impression formation, judgment, and decision making<ref name ="slovic2007"/>.

			=== Perception of Risk and Benefit ===
	Another limitation is how we perceive risk and reward. It has been found that our perception of risk and benefit is negatively correlated<ref name ="slovic2007"/>. This means that an outcome with high benefit yields a low risk in many judgment situations and vice versa. An example would be a person who decides if they should smoke again to seem cool. For them, the benefit of fitting in with the rest of the group might be significant enough to make the risk of lung cancer seem small. This is interesting since high risk usually yields high reward, and low risk yields low reward. The same goes for when a decision-maker must choose between several alternatives. A study from 2020 done by Slovic et al. verified that the affect heuristic drives judgment in risk and benefit both in a situation with several alternatives to choose between and in a situation where a single option is evaluated <ref name="affect2020">		Another limitation is how we perceive risk and reward. It has been found that our perception of risk and benefit is negatively correlated<ref name ="slovic2007"/>. This means that an outcome with high benefit yields a low risk in many judgment situations and vice versa. An example would be a person who decides if they should smoke again to seem cool. For them, the benefit of fitting in with the rest of the group might be significant enough to make the risk of lung cancer seem small. This is interesting since high risk usually yields high reward, and low risk yields low reward. The same goes for when a decision-maker must choose between several alternatives. A study from 2020 done by Slovic et al. verified that the affect heuristic drives judgment in risk and benefit both in a situation with several alternatives to choose between and in a situation where a single option is evaluated <ref name="affect2020">
	Skagerlund, K., Forsblad, M., Slovic, P. & Västfjäll, D. (2020): The Affect Heuristic and Risk Perception – Stability Across Elicitation Methods and Individual Cognitive Abilities. Frontiers in Psychology.		Skagerlund, K., Forsblad, M., Slovic, P. & Västfjäll, D. (2020): The Affect Heuristic and Risk Perception – Stability Across Elicitation Methods and Individual Cognitive Abilities. Frontiers in Psychology.

Mwschmidt: /* Limitations of the Affect Heuristic */

2021-02-28T18:20:30Z

Limitations of the Affect Heuristic

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:20, 28 February 2021
Line 52:		Line 52:

	== Limitations of the Affect Heuristic ==		== Limitations of the Affect Heuristic ==
	The affect heuristic is, as mentioned, something that often happens unconsciously in our minds. Affect comes from how the person perceives situations from different perspectives and contexts. This means that there are several ways it can be manipulated, which limits the effectiveness depending on the affect heuristic in decision-making. Bounded awareness and bounded rationality are some of the limitations of the affect heuristic.		The affect heuristic is, as mentioned, something that often happens unconsciously in our minds. Affect comes from how the person perceives situations from different perspectives and contexts. This means that there are several ways it can be manipulated, which limits the effectiveness depending on the affect heuristic in decision-making. Bounded awareness and bounded rationality are some of the limitations of the affect heuristic, but Slovic's paper also found that the mind perception of risk differs from reality.

	~~=== Bounded awareness and rationality ===~~
	The human brain receives an enormous amount of information every single day. To avoid information overload, the brain must filter through all this information. This happens unconsciously and depends on the person’s energy level, health, interests, and many other factors what information gets stored<ref name ="bazerman"/>. Since the information includes the somatic markers, the affect heuristic is already very limited by our own ability to store information efficiently. The following describes various tendencies that lie within the bounded awareness term<ref name ="bazerman"/>.		The human brain receives an enormous amount of information every single day. To avoid information overload, the brain must filter through all this information. This happens unconsciously and depends on the person’s energy level, health, interests, and many other factors what information gets stored<ref name ="bazerman"/>. Since the information includes the somatic markers, the affect heuristic is already very limited by our own ability to store information efficiently. The following describes various tendencies that lie within the bounded awareness term<ref name ="bazerman"/>.

Line 62:		Line 61:

	In many cases, decision-making in a group setting comes with lots of advantages. The group can share critical information and discuss their experience. However, a study from 1985 showed that group discussion “… tended to increase the recall of information that supported the initially most popular (and ultimately winning) candidate even though this information was primarily shared before the discussion.” <ref name="pooling">Stasser, G. & Titus, W. (1985): Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making:		In many cases, decision-making in a group setting comes with lots of advantages. The group can share critical information and discuss their experience. However, a study from 1985 showed that group discussion “… tended to increase the recall of information that supported the initially most popular (and ultimately winning) candidate even though this information was primarily shared before the discussion.” <ref name="pooling">Stasser, G. & Titus, W. (1985): Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making:
	Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. In Journal of Pereonality and Social Psychology (1985). the American Psychological Association, Inc.</ref>. This will also limit the information needed to make the right decision based on the affect heuristic. A good project manager will provide a procedure, which promotes the sharing of new knowledge since it is his/her job to have a complete overview.		Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. In Journal of Pereonality and Social Psychology (1985). the American Psychological Association, Inc.</ref>. In short, it means that groups of people prefer to discuss already shared information instead of new knowledge. This will also limit the information needed to make the right decision based on the affect heuristic. A good project manager will provide a procedure, which promotes the sharing of new knowledge since it is his/her job to have a complete overview.

	The lack of information keeps us from evaluating all possible outcomes and simplifying the decision, which leads to making a choice that will satisfy the stakeholders but might not optimize the project outcome. This is called bounded rationality and is an example of the lazy human brain. It confirms that we tend to deviate from rationality if we have not been given a decision-making framework, which encourages the project team to gather the necessary information and explore where information is lacking. The more relevant information that has been stored, the more precise is the somatic marker. More precise somatic markers provide better impression formation, judgment, and decision making<ref name ="slovic2007"/>.		The lack of information keeps us from evaluating all possible outcomes and simplifying the decision, which leads to making a choice that will satisfy the stakeholders but might not optimize the project outcome. This is called bounded rationality and is an example of the lazy human brain. It confirms that we tend to deviate from rationality if we have not been given a decision-making framework, which encourages the project team to gather the necessary information and explore where information is lacking. The more relevant information that has been stored, the more precise is the somatic marker. More precise somatic markers provide better impression formation, judgment, and decision making<ref name ="slovic2007"/>.


	~~=== How we perceive risk and benefit ===~~

	Another limitation is how we perceive risk and reward. It has been found that our perception of risk and benefit is negatively correlated<ref name ="slovic2007"/>. This means that an outcome with high benefit yields a low risk in many judgment situations and vice versa. An example would be a person who decides if they should smoke again to seem cool. For them, the benefit of fitting in with the rest of the group might be significant enough to make the risk of lung cancer seem small. This is interesting since high risk usually yields high reward, and low risk yields low reward. The same goes for when a decision-maker must choose between several alternatives. A study from 2020 done by Slovic et al. verified that the affect heuristic drives judgment in risk and benefit both in a situation with several alternatives to choose between and in a situation where a single option is evaluated <ref name="affect2020">		Another limitation is how we perceive risk and reward. It has been found that our perception of risk and benefit is negatively correlated<ref name ="slovic2007"/>. This means that an outcome with high benefit yields a low risk in many judgment situations and vice versa. An example would be a person who decides if they should smoke again to seem cool. For them, the benefit of fitting in with the rest of the group might be significant enough to make the risk of lung cancer seem small. This is interesting since high risk usually yields high reward, and low risk yields low reward. The same goes for when a decision-maker must choose between several alternatives. A study from 2020 done by Slovic et al. verified that the affect heuristic drives judgment in risk and benefit both in a situation with several alternatives to choose between and in a situation where a single option is evaluated <ref name="affect2020">
Line 73:		Line 69:
	</ref>. It has also been found that this negative correlation would be enhanced under time pressure <ref name ="slovic2007"/>. It is important to know this when deciding whether to take risks in a project since it can lead to overconfidence.		</ref>. It has also been found that this negative correlation would be enhanced under time pressure <ref name ="slovic2007"/>. It is important to know this when deciding whether to take risks in a project since it can lead to overconfidence.

	Though the affect heuristic has significant limitations, project management literature and frameworks can be applied to avoid affect being the main factor in decisions. Usually, good planning, documentation, and clear communication will prevent a situation where the limited time precludes evaluating alternatives and solutions.		Though the affect heuristic has significant limitations, project management literature and frameworks can be applied to avoid affect being the main factor in decisions. Usually, good planning, documentation, and clear communication will prevent a situation where the limited time precludes evaluating alternatives and solutions.

	== Annotated Bibliography ==		== Annotated Bibliography ==

Mwschmidt at 18:14, 28 February 2021

2021-02-28T18:14:46Z

Show changes

Mwschmidt: /* Annotated Bibliography */

2021-02-28T17:28:32Z

Annotated Bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:28, 28 February 2021
Line 76:		Line 76:

	'''Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007): The Affect Heuristic. Reprinted from Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., Kahneman, D. (2002), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment.'''<br />		'''Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2007): The Affect Heuristic. Reprinted from Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., Kahneman, D. (2002), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment.'''<br />
	This paper describes the affect heuristic in detail and verifies its presence in decision-making through various studies. The article has provided the background information necessary to find how it can be used in a project management setting. Further research and exploration of the affect heuristic have been made by Slovic in collaboration with other authors.		This paper describes the affect heuristic in detail and verifies its presence in decision-making through various studies. The article has provided the background information necessary to find how it can be used in a project management setting. For this article, especially the section on the perception of risk and benefit, has been used to underline the connection between the affect heuristic and risk management. Further research and exploration of the affect heuristic have been made by Slovic in collaboration with other authors.

	'''Project Management Institute, Inc. (2017): Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (6th Edition). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI).'''<br />		'''Project Management Institute, Inc. (2017): Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (6th Edition). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI).'''<br />

Mwschmidt at 17:23, 28 February 2021

2021-02-28T17:23:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:23, 28 February 2021
Line 7:		Line 7:

	In addition, the somatic markers offer the ability to anticipate outcomes <ref name="slovic2007"/>, which means it is useful in risk management. If the decision-maker has had a similar experience to the situation they are analyzing, they can quickly use the affect heuristic to identify risks, their probability, and their impact. People tend to perceive risk and benefit differently from reality. Rationally high risk can yield high reward and vice versa. However, most people find that when their personal benefit is high enough, the risk is less <ref name="slovic2007"/>. Therefore, it is essential to know what lies behind decisions. Understanding how the mind makes decisions can help backtrack bad decisions or even prevent them since the decision-maker is now aware of his/her bias. This article aims to combine the theory and discoveries from Slovic et al.’s definition of the affect heuristic with project management theories and standards to explain how it occurs and how it can be used in a project management setting.		In addition, the somatic markers offer the ability to anticipate outcomes <ref name="slovic2007"/>, which means it is useful in risk management. If the decision-maker has had a similar experience to the situation they are analyzing, they can quickly use the affect heuristic to identify risks, their probability, and their impact. People tend to perceive risk and benefit differently from reality. Rationally high risk can yield high reward and vice versa. However, most people find that when their personal benefit is high enough, the risk is less <ref name="slovic2007"/>. Therefore, it is essential to know what lies behind decisions. Understanding how the mind makes decisions can help backtrack bad decisions or even prevent them since the decision-maker is now aware of his/her bias. This article aims to combine the theory and discoveries from Slovic et al.’s definition of the affect heuristic with project management theories and standards to explain how it occurs and how it can be used in a project management setting.