The Study of Human Decision-Making: A Cautionary Tale from the World of Experimental Gaming

Abstract

In recent years there has been a move within the Operational Research community towards the view that the established methods may be inadequate for dealing with complex problems and that an understanding of human decision-making itself is needed. Recognising the importance of this, however, leaves open the question of how research in this area should best proceed. In this paper we look at the difference between two contrasting approaches; that is, between simply collecting hard data about the overt decisions people make under specified conditions and actually trying to explore the (subjective) reasons for this behaviour. Specifically, these issues are examined within the context of some work done with experimental gaming. The example clearly illustrates how failure to examine a variety of possible explanations for behaviour may lead to fundamentally inaccurate conclusions. Finally, it is concluded that in order to study decision-making effectively, it is vitally important that evidence is taken from as wide a variety of sources as possible.