Abstract
The effects of varying decision outcome dispersion on organizational decision making were investigated under individual and group decision making conditions. Thirty-six female and pg]36 male subjects made decisions for organizational decision scenarios in which outcomes affected primarily the decision maker, people other than the decision maker, or a group of which the decision maker was a member. Subjects rated their levels of perceived risk and confidence in their decisions and made decisions within a simulated context of either a small or a large organization. Results indicated that subjects perceived significantly less risk and more confidence in their decisions when outcomes affected primarily themselves rather than others regardless of whether the decisions were made individually or by a group. Males perceived their decisions as significantly more risky than females. Induced organizational size did not significantly influence decision making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
BLAU, P. (1987). A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociological Review, 35, 201–208.
DAVIDSON, A. R., & MORRISON, D. M. (1982). Social psychological models of decision making. Research in Marketing, Suppl. 1, 91–112.
DIBERARDINIS, J., RAMAGE, K., & LEAVITT, S. (1984). Risky shift and gender of the advocate: Information theory versus normative theory. Group and Organization Studies, 9(1), 189–200.
FANDT, P. M., & FERRIS, G. R. (1990). The management of information and impressions: When employees behave opportunistically. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 140–158.
FORD, R., ARMANDI, B. R., & HEATON, C. P. (1988). Size. In Organization theory: An integrative approach. New York: Harper & Row.
HALL, R. H. (1972). Organizational size. Organizations: Structure and process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
HUDGENS, G. A., & FATKIN, L. T. (1984). Sex differences in risk taking: Repeated sessions on a computer-simulated task. The Journal of Psychology, 119(3), 197–206.
KOGAN, N., & WALLACH, M. (1964). Risk taking: A study in cognition and personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
KOGAN, N., & ZALESKA, M. (1969). Level of risk selected by individuals and groups when deciding for self and for others. Proceedings of the 77th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 4 (Pt. 1), 423–424.
LAUGHLIN, P. R., & EARLEY, P. C. (1982). Social combination models, persuasive arguments theory, social comparison theory, and choice shift. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(2), 273–280.
LIPSHITZ, R. (1989). Either a “medal or a corporal”: The effects of success and failure on the evaluation of decision making and decision makers. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 380–395.
NIGRO, F. A., & NIGRO, L. G. (1984). Decision making. Modern public administration. New York: Harper & Row.
OFFERMAND, L. R., & GOWING, M. K. (1990). Organizations of the future: Changes and challenges. American Psychologist, 45, 95–108.
PITZ, G. F., & SACHS, N. J. (1984). Judgment and decision: Theory and application. Annual Review of Psychology, 35, 139–163.
SAWYER, J. E. (1990). Effects of risks and ambiguity on judgments of contingency relations and behavioral resource allocation decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 85–110.
SLOVIC, P., WEINSTEIN, M. S., & LICHTENSTEIN, S. (1967). Sex differences in the risk a person selects for himself and the risks he selects for someone else. (Research Bulletin No. 10) Vol. 7. Eugene: Oregon Research Institute.
SNIEZEK, J. A., & HENRY, R. A. (1990). Revision, weighting, and commitment in consensus group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 66–84.
STREUFERT, S. (1987). Decision making: Research and theory challenges for applied social psychology. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 609–621.
SUNDSTROM, E., DEMEUSE, K. P., & FUTRELL, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120–133.
TETLOCK, D. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 297–332). Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.
TUTTLE, T. C. (1988). Technology, organizations of the future, and non-management roles. In J. Hage (Ed.), Futures of organizations (pp. 163–180). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
VANDER ZANDEN, J. W. (1987). Gender roles, identities, and sexuality. Social psychology. New York: Random House.
WALLACH, M. A., KOGAN, N., & BEM, D. J. (1964). Diffusion of responsibility and level of risk taken. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68, 263–274.
WILKE, H., & MEERTENS, R. (1973). Individual risk taking for self and others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(4), 403–413.
ZALESKA, M., & KOGAN, N. (1971). Level of risk selected by individuals and groups when deciding for self and for others. Sociometry, 34, 198–213.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Pamela A. Brand for comments on a draft of this article.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gioffre, K.R., Lawson, R.B. & Gordon, L.R. The Effects of Decision Outcome Dispersion Upon Organizational Decision Making. Psychol Rec 42, 427–436 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03399611
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03399611