心理因素、认知偏差ф和认知失调如何影响工作绩效和决策?

IF 1.2 Q4 MANAGEMENT
Gayane Tovmasyan
{"title":"心理因素、认知偏差ф和认知失调如何影响工作绩效和决策?","authors":"Gayane Tovmasyan","doi":"10.21272/mmi.2023.3-04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper outlines the viewpoints and opposing perspectives in the scientific discourse on the issue of the impact of psychological factors on the working environment. The analysis of the literature proves that the efficiency of work performance and decision making in organizations also depends on psychological factors. The main goal of the paper is to explore whether psychological factors, cognitive biases and cognitive dissonance affect work performance and decision making․ Understanding the impact of psychological factors on the working environment is important for organizations and decision-making processes, as based on the results, innovative solutions may be applied for better management and HR policies. Methodological instruments are based on a survey and Pearson chi-square analysis. This empirical study presents survey results among 100 participants. According to the results, 83% of respondents think that the most effective managers/employees are calm and balanced people (phlegmatic). Cognitive biases and dissonance hinder work performance, although sometimes people do not realize it. Based on the situations that were frequent among participants, the most frequent cognitive biases are choice-supportive bias, groupthink, authority bias, ostrich effect, IKEA effect, optimism bias, confirmation bias, anchoring bias, etc. However, 90% do nothing to overcome cognitive biases, as many of them do not realize that they have biases. Similarly, 75% mentioned that they have experienced cognitive dissonance in their behavior, but they do nothing to overcome it. The study empirically and theoretically validates that cognitive biases and dissonance can affect decision-making, communications and interactions with other people. The results of the Pearson chi-square analysis showed that mainly phlegmatic people have experienced the influence of cognitive biases and cognitive dissonance on their work experience. Additionally, mainly choleric and phlegmatic people try to overcome cognitive biases, while sanguine people try to do something to overcome cognitive dissonance. The analysis may be useful for organizations, managers, and workers to understand the hindering factors that may affect decision making and work performance. Additionally, the paper recommends using innovative methods of group decision making, developing critical and innovative thinking skills among employees, adjusting HR policies, applying innovative forms and styles of leadership and participative management, etc.","PeriodicalId":45989,"journal":{"name":"Marketing and Management of Innovations","volume":"171 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Do Psychological Factors, Cognitive Biases фnd Cognitive Dissonance Affect the Work Performance and Decision Making?\",\"authors\":\"Gayane Tovmasyan\",\"doi\":\"10.21272/mmi.2023.3-04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper outlines the viewpoints and opposing perspectives in the scientific discourse on the issue of the impact of psychological factors on the working environment. The analysis of the literature proves that the efficiency of work performance and decision making in organizations also depends on psychological factors. The main goal of the paper is to explore whether psychological factors, cognitive biases and cognitive dissonance affect work performance and decision making․ Understanding the impact of psychological factors on the working environment is important for organizations and decision-making processes, as based on the results, innovative solutions may be applied for better management and HR policies. Methodological instruments are based on a survey and Pearson chi-square analysis. This empirical study presents survey results among 100 participants. According to the results, 83% of respondents think that the most effective managers/employees are calm and balanced people (phlegmatic). Cognitive biases and dissonance hinder work performance, although sometimes people do not realize it. Based on the situations that were frequent among participants, the most frequent cognitive biases are choice-supportive bias, groupthink, authority bias, ostrich effect, IKEA effect, optimism bias, confirmation bias, anchoring bias, etc. However, 90% do nothing to overcome cognitive biases, as many of them do not realize that they have biases. Similarly, 75% mentioned that they have experienced cognitive dissonance in their behavior, but they do nothing to overcome it. The study empirically and theoretically validates that cognitive biases and dissonance can affect decision-making, communications and interactions with other people. The results of the Pearson chi-square analysis showed that mainly phlegmatic people have experienced the influence of cognitive biases and cognitive dissonance on their work experience. Additionally, mainly choleric and phlegmatic people try to overcome cognitive biases, while sanguine people try to do something to overcome cognitive dissonance. The analysis may be useful for organizations, managers, and workers to understand the hindering factors that may affect decision making and work performance. Additionally, the paper recommends using innovative methods of group decision making, developing critical and innovative thinking skills among employees, adjusting HR policies, applying innovative forms and styles of leadership and participative management, etc.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Marketing and Management of Innovations\",\"volume\":\"171 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Marketing and Management of Innovations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2023.3-04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Marketing and Management of Innovations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2023.3-04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文概述了心理因素对工作环境影响这一问题的科学论述中的观点和对立观点。文献分析证明,组织的工作绩效和决策效率也取决于心理因素。本文的主要目的是探讨心理因素、认知偏差和认知失调是否会影响工作绩效和决策。了解心理因素对工作环境的影响对组织和决策过程很重要,因为基于结果,创新的解决方案可能会应用于更好的管理和人力资源政策。方法工具是基于调查和皮尔逊卡方分析。本实证研究呈现了100名参与者的调查结果。结果显示,83%的受访者认为最有效的管理者/员工是冷静、平衡的人(phlegmatic)。认知偏差和认知失调会阻碍工作表现,尽管有时人们并没有意识到这一点。从被试常见的情境来看,最常见的认知偏差有选择支持偏差、群体思维、权威偏差、鸵鸟效应、宜家效应、乐观偏差、确认偏差、锚定偏差等。然而,90%的人没有采取任何措施来克服认知偏见,因为他们中的许多人没有意识到自己有偏见。同样,75%的人提到他们在行为中经历过认知失调,但他们没有采取任何措施来克服它。该研究从实证和理论上证实了认知偏差和失调会影响决策、沟通和与他人的互动。Pearson卡方分析结果显示,以痰质为主的人群在工作体验中经历了认知偏差和认知失调的影响。此外,主要是胆汁和粘液的人试图克服认知偏见,而乐观的人试图做一些事情来克服认知失调。该分析可能有助于组织、管理人员和员工了解可能影响决策和工作绩效的阻碍因素。此外,本文还建议采用创新的群体决策方法,培养员工的批判性和创新性思维技能,调整人力资源政策,采用创新的领导形式和风格以及参与式管理等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Do Psychological Factors, Cognitive Biases фnd Cognitive Dissonance Affect the Work Performance and Decision Making?
This paper outlines the viewpoints and opposing perspectives in the scientific discourse on the issue of the impact of psychological factors on the working environment. The analysis of the literature proves that the efficiency of work performance and decision making in organizations also depends on psychological factors. The main goal of the paper is to explore whether psychological factors, cognitive biases and cognitive dissonance affect work performance and decision making․ Understanding the impact of psychological factors on the working environment is important for organizations and decision-making processes, as based on the results, innovative solutions may be applied for better management and HR policies. Methodological instruments are based on a survey and Pearson chi-square analysis. This empirical study presents survey results among 100 participants. According to the results, 83% of respondents think that the most effective managers/employees are calm and balanced people (phlegmatic). Cognitive biases and dissonance hinder work performance, although sometimes people do not realize it. Based on the situations that were frequent among participants, the most frequent cognitive biases are choice-supportive bias, groupthink, authority bias, ostrich effect, IKEA effect, optimism bias, confirmation bias, anchoring bias, etc. However, 90% do nothing to overcome cognitive biases, as many of them do not realize that they have biases. Similarly, 75% mentioned that they have experienced cognitive dissonance in their behavior, but they do nothing to overcome it. The study empirically and theoretically validates that cognitive biases and dissonance can affect decision-making, communications and interactions with other people. The results of the Pearson chi-square analysis showed that mainly phlegmatic people have experienced the influence of cognitive biases and cognitive dissonance on their work experience. Additionally, mainly choleric and phlegmatic people try to overcome cognitive biases, while sanguine people try to do something to overcome cognitive dissonance. The analysis may be useful for organizations, managers, and workers to understand the hindering factors that may affect decision making and work performance. Additionally, the paper recommends using innovative methods of group decision making, developing critical and innovative thinking skills among employees, adjusting HR policies, applying innovative forms and styles of leadership and participative management, etc.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
7.70%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信