Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding decision making during emergencies: a key contributor to resilience

  • Original Article
  • Published:
EURO Journal on Decision Processes

Abstract

The resilience of systems derives from many inputs, relating both to design and to operational planning. In the latter context the role and effective functioning of the ‘blue light’ emergency services is often critical. The judgements and decisions that have to be made are complex and time-constrained, often undertaken before all the critical information that might be wanted is available. Recent developments in decision research, notably the on-going dual process debate, suggest that the process of decision making adopted is often more complex than had previously been appreciated and strongly linked to both context and individual factors, notably expertise. In the light of such developments, this paper presents an empirical study of emergency responders working in realistic, non-laboratory conditions. It argues that recent moves to recognise the need to support, through the way in which information is provided, more intuitive as well as analytic modes of thinking in decision support are timely and that an important research agenda exists linking decision support design with a fuller understanding of exactly how individuals make their decisions in emergency conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alby F, Zucchermaglio C (2006) Afterwards we can understand what went wrong, but now let’s fix it: how situated work practices shape group decision making. Org Stud 27(7):943–966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen D (2011) Information behavior and decision making in time-constrained practice: a dual-processing perspective. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 62(11):2165–2181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen D, Karanasios S, Slavova M (2011) Working with activity theory: context, technology, and information behavior. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 62(4):776–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambert A-M, Adler PA, Adler P, Detzner DF (1995) Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. J Marriage Fam 57(4):879–893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artemeva N, Freedman A (2001) Just the boys playing on computers: an activity theory analysis of differences in the cultures of two engineering firms. J Bus Tech Commun 15(2):164–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beech N, Greig G, Patrick H, Sims D (2010) Sound waves- learning from mistake and repair in improvisation. University of St Andrews

  • Chen R, Sharman R, Rao HR, Upadhyaya S (2007) Design principles for critical incident response systems. Inf Syst eBus Manag 5(3):201

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen R, Sharman R, Chakravarti N, Rao HR, Upadhyaya SJ (2008) emergency response information system interoperability: development of chemical incident response data model. J Assoc Inf Syst 9(3):200–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Choo CW (2009) Information use and early warning effectiveness: perspectives and prospects. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 60(5):1071–1082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comfort LK (2007) Crisis management in hindsight: cognition, communication and control. Public Administration Review, special issue, 189–97

  • Comfort LK, Sungu Y, Johnson D, Dunn M (2001) complex systems in crisis: anticipation and resilience in dynamic environments. J Conting Crisis Manag 9(3):144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford K, Hasan H (2006) Demonstrations of the activity theory framework for reserach in information systems. Australas J Inf Syst 13(2):49–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Dervin B (1996) Given a context by any other name: Methodological tools for taming the unruly beast. Keynote paper, ISIC 96: Information seeking in context, 1–23

  • DeWalt KM, DeWalt BR (2002) Participant observation: a guide for fieldworkers. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek

    Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 37:32–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley M (1997) The role of situation awareness in naturalistic decision making. In: Zsambok C, Klein G (eds) Mahwah. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström Y (1987) Learning by expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström Y (2000) Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics 43(7):960

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström Y (2001) Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. J Educ Work 14:133–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JSBT (2008) Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annu Rev Psychol 59:255–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JSBT (2011) Dual-process theories of reasoning: contemporary issues and developmental applications. Dev Rev 31(2–3):86–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan JC (1954) The critical incident technique. Psychol Bull 51(4):327–358

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein N, McAdam D (2012) A Theory of Fields. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Garstka J, Alberts D (2004) Network centric operations conceptual framework version 2.0, US office of force transformation and office of the assistant secretary of defense for networks and information integration

  • Gore J, Banks A, Millward L, Kyriakidou O (2006) naturalistic decision making and organizations: reviewing pragmatic science. Org Stud 27(7):925–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greitzer FL, Podmore R, Robinson M, Ey P (2010) Naturalistic decision making for power system operators. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 26(2–3):278–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamm RM (1988) Clinical intuition and clinical analyssis: expertise and the cognitive continuum. In: Dowei J, Elstein A (eds) Professional judgement: a reader in clinical decision making. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond KR (1996) Human judgment and social policy: irreducible uncertainty, inevitable error, unavoidable injustice. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond KR (2010) Intuition, No! …Quasirationality, Yes! Psychol Inq 21(4):327–337

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgkinson GP, Sadler-Smith E, Burke LA, Claxton G, Sparrow PR (2009) Intuition in organizations: implications for strategic management. Long Range Plan 42(3):277–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth RM (2010) Intuition: a challenge for psychological research on decision making. Psychol Inq 21(4):338–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iivari J, Linger H (1999) Knowledge work as collaborative work: a situated activity theory view. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

  • Johnson A, Sackett R (1998) Direct systematic observation of behavior. In: Bernard HR (ed) Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaber DB, Endsley MR (2003) The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 3:1–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. Penguin Books, London

  • Kahneman D, Klein G (2009) Conditions for intuitive expertise: a failure to disagree. Am Psychol 64(6):515–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kanno T, Futura K (2006) Resilience of emergency response systems, 2nd resilience engineering international symposium, Sophia Antipolis (France), 8–10 Nov 2006

  • Karanasios S, Mishra JL, Allen DK, Norman A, Thakker D, Lau L (2011) Capturing real world activity: a socio-technical approach paper presented at the echallenges. Retrieved from http://www.echallenges.org/e2012/outbox/eChallenges_e20011_ref_118_doc_7429.pdf

  • Kawulich BB (2005) Participant observation as a data collection method, vol 6

  • Klein G (1997a) An overview of naturalistic decision making applications. In: Zsambok CE, Klein G (eds) In naturalistic decision making. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 49–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G (1997b) The recognition-primed decision (RPD) model: looking back, looking forward. In: Zsambok CE, Klein G (eds) Naturalistic decision making mahwah. Lawerence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G (1998) Sources of power: how people make decisions. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G, Moon B, Hoffman RF (2006) Making sense of sensemaking I: alternative perspectives. IEEE Intell Syst 21(4):70–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kutti K (1999) Activity theory, transformation of work, and information systems design. In: Engeström Y, Miettinen R, Punamaki RL (eds) Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 360–376

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • LESLP (2007) Major incident: procedure manual. Report- London Emergency Services Liaison Panel

  • Lim CP, Hang D (2003) An activity theory approach to research of ICT integration in Singapore schools. Comput Educ 41(1):49–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundberg J, Asplund M (2011) Communication problems in crisis response. In: Proceedings of the 8th International ISCRAM Conference, Lisbon, Portugal

  • McClelland D (1998) Identifying competencies with behavioral-event interviews. Psychol Sci 9:331–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendonça DJ, Wallace W (2007) A cognitive model of improvisation in emergency management. IEEE Trans Syst, Man & Cybern: Part A 37(4):547–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra JL, Allen DK, Pearman AD (2011) Activity theory as a methodological and analytical framework for information practices in emergency management. paper presented at the information systems for crisis response and management (ISCRAM), Lisbon, Portugal (8–11 May)

  • Mwanza D (2001) Where theory meets practice: a case for an activity theory based methodology to guide computer system design

  • Nardi BA (1996) Studying context: a comparision of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition. In: Nardi BA (ed) Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction. MIT Press, Cambride

    Google Scholar 

  • NPIA (2009) Manual of guidance on the managment, command and deployment of armed officers. Retrieved from www.npia.police.uk/en/docs/MCD_Armed_Officers_Gen3_100709.pdf

  • Perry NC, Wiggins MW, Childs M, Fogarty G (2012) Can reduced processing decision support interfaces improve the decision-making of less-experienced incident commanders? Decis Support Syst 52(2):497–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J (1983) Skills, rules, and knowledge; Signals, signs, and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models. IEEE transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics, SMC 13:257–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler-Smith E, Shefy E (2004) The intuitive executive: understanding and applying ‘gut feel’ in decision-making. Acad Manag Exec 18(4):76–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas E, Rosen MA, DiazGranados D (2010) Expertise-based intuition and decision making in organizations. J Manag 36(4):941–973

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen M, Carswell M, Santhanam R, Bailey K (2012) Emergency management information systems: could decision makers be supported in choosing display formats? Decis Support Syst 52(2):318–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffrin RM, Schneider W (1977) Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychol Rev 84:127–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Q J Econ 69(1):99–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair M (2010) Misconceptions about intuition. Psychol Inq 21(4):378–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnenwald D, Pierce LG (2000) Information behavior in dynamic group work contexts: interwoven situational awareness, dense social networks and contested collaboration in command and control. Inf Process Manage 36(3):461–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich KE, West RF (2000) Individual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate? Behav Brain Sci 23(5):645–665

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich KE, West RF, Toplak ME (2011) The complexity of developmental predictions from dual process models. Dev Rev 31(2–3):103–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research, 2nd edn. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson C, Cullum N, McCaughan D, Sheldon T, Raynor P (2004) Nurses, information use, and clinical decision making—the real world potential for evidence-based decisions in nursing. Evid Based Nurs 7(3):68–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1986) Rational choice and the framing of decisions, J Bus 59 (4, pt. 2):S251–S278

  • Urquhart C, Light A, Thomas R, Barker A, Yeoman A, Cooper J et al (2003) Critical incident technique and explicitation interviewing in studies of information behavior. Librar Inf Sci Res 25(1):63–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warfield C (2008) The disaster management cycle. Retrieved from http://www.gdrc.org/uem/disasters/1-dm_cycle.html

  • Weick K (1995) Sensemaking in organisations. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson TD (2006) A re-examination of information seeking behaviour in the context of activity theory. Information Research, 11(4). Available at: http://informationr.net/ir/11-14/paper260.html

  • Wybo J-L, Latiers M (2006) Exploring complex emergency situations’ dynamic: theoretical, epistemological and methodological proposals. Int J Emerg Manage 3(1):40–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by ESRC and 1Spatial, a Cambridge-based software company specialising in high volume, business critical data. The authors would like to thank Dr. Mike Sanderson of 1Spatial and Dr Robert MacFarlane of the Cabinet Office Emergency Planning College for his help in providing access for data collection. Special thanks to all the participants for sharing their experience. The views stated here are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the emergency services in the UK or the funders.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bradford University School of Management, Emm Lane, Bradford, BD9 4JL, UK

    J. L. Mishra

  2. Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    D. K. Allen & A. D. Pearman

Authors
  1. J. L. Mishra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. K. Allen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. D. Pearman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. D. Pearman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mishra, J.L., Allen, D.K. & Pearman, A.D. Understanding decision making during emergencies: a key contributor to resilience. EURO J Decis Process 3, 397–424 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-015-0039-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-015-0039-z

Keywords

Mathematics subject classification

Search

Navigation