Approbation of the Decision Making Tendency Inventory in the Russian Sample

2503

Abstract

We present the results of approbating the Decision Making Tendency Inventory (Misuraca et al., 2015) in the Russian sample (N=423, Mage= 25,01, SD = 9,63). The development of H. Simon’s satisficing theory in the current studies is considered. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the theoretical three-scale structure of the inventory. We describe the relations between maximizing, minimizing and satisficing scales and personal factors of decision-making, age, and education (its level and difficulty). The study demonstrates that maximizing and satisficing are close tendencies, implemented in case of making important effortful and resource-consuming (e.g., time-consuming) decisions, whereas minimizing is connected to withdrawal from effort and knowledge, avoidant strategies and ambiguity intolerance. The yielded results suggest that satisficing needs to be trained in conditions of high demands for the cognitive sphere such as studying in a higher education institution.

General Information

Keywords: DMTI, maximizing, minimizing, satisficing, decision-making

Journal rubric: Testing and Validating Instruments

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/cpp.2018260308

For citation: Razvaliaeva A.Y. Approbation of the Decision Making Tendency Inventory in the Russian Sample. Konsul'tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya = Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2018. Vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 146–163. DOI: 10.17759/cpp.2018260308. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

  1. Asmolov A.G. Psikhologiya sovremennosti: vyzovy neopredelennosti, slozhnosti i raznoobraziya. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [ Psychological Studies], 2015. Vol. 8 (40), p. 1. Available at: http://psystudy.ru (Accessed 01.06.2018).
  2. Kornilova T.V. Psikhologiya riska i prinyatiya reshenii [The psychology of risk and desicion-making]. Moscow: Aspekt Press, 2003. 286 p.
  3. Kornilova T.V. Novyi oprosnik tolerantnosti-intolerantnosti k neopredelennosti [Tolerance-intolerance of ambiguity new questionnaire]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2010. Vol. 31 (1), pp. 74—86.
  4. Kornilova T.V. Mel’burnskii oprosnik prinyatiya reshenii: russkoyazychnaya adaptatsiya [Melbourne decision making questionnaire: a Russian adaptation] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [Psychological Studies], 2013. Vol. 6 (31), p. 4. Available at: http://psystudy.ru (Accessed 7.12.2017). (In Russ., abstr. in Engl.).
  5. Kornilova T.V. Psikhologiya neopredelennosti: edinstvo intellektual’no-lichnostnoi regulyatsii reshenii i vyborov [Psychology of ambiguity: unity of intellectual and personal regulation of decisions and choices]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2013. Vol. 34 (3), pp. 89—100.
  6. Kornilova T.V. Intellektual’no-lichnostnyi potentsial cheloveka v usloviyakh neopredelennosti i riska [Intellectual and personal potential in risk and uncertainty]. Saint Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 2016. 344 p.
  7. Kornilova T.V., Razvaliaeva A.Yu. Aprobatsiya russkoyazychnogo varianta polnogo oprosnika S. Epstaina Ratsional’nyi-Opytnyi (rational-experiental inventory) [The rationality and intuition scales in S. Epstein’s questionnaire Rei (Russian approbation of the full version)]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2017. Vol. 38 (3), pp. 92—107. doi: 10.7868/S0205959217030084
  8. Kornilova T.V., Chumakova M.A. Shkaly tolerantnosti i intolerantnosti k neopredelennosti v modifikatsii oprosnika S. Badnera [Tolerance and intolerance of ambiguity in the modification of Budner’s questionnaire]. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya [Experimental Psychology], 2014. Vol. 7 (1), pp. 92—110. (In Russ., abstr. in Engl.).
  9. Kornilova T.V., Chumakova M.A. Aprobatsiya kratkogo oprosnika Bol’shoi pyaterki (TIPI, KOBT) [Elektronnyi resurs] [Development of the Russian version of the brief Big Five questionnaire (TIPI)]. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [Psychological Studies], 2016. Vol. 9 (46), p. 5. Available at: http://psystudy.ru (Accessed 01.02.2018). (In Russ., abstr. in Engl.).
  10. 10. Smirnov S.D., Chumakova M.A., Kornilova T.V. Obraz mira v dinamicheskoi paradigme prognozirovaniya i kontrolya neopredelennosti [The world image in dynamic control of uncertainty]. Voprosy Psikhologii, 2016, no. 4, pp. 3—14.
  11. 11. Sokolova E.T. Utrata Ya: klinika ili novaya kul’turnaya norma [Loss of Self: Clinical Phenomena or New Cultural Norm?]. Epistemologiya & filosofskie nauki [Epistemology & Philosophy of science], 2014. Vol. 41 (3), pp. 190—210.
  12. 12. Feigenberg I.M. Tipichnye netipichnosti: zhiznennye zadachi — shkole [Typical strangeness: life problems in school]. Obrazovatel’naya politika [Education Policy], 2010, no. 7—8 (45—46), pp. 84—95.
  13. 13. Brothers D. Toward a Psychology Of Uncertainty: Trauma-Centered Psychoanalysis. New York: Analytic Press, 2008. 223 p.
  14. 14. Cheek N.N., Schwartz B. On the meaning and measurement of maximization. Judgment and Decision Making, 2016. Vol. 11 (2), pp. 126—146.
  15. 15. Diab D.L., Gillespie M.A., Highhouse S. Are maximizers really unhappy? The measurement of maximizing tendency. Judgment and Decision Making, 2008. Vol. 3 (5), pp. 364—370.
  16. Iyengar S.S., Wells R.E., Schwartz B. Doing better but feeling worse: Looking for the “best” job undermines satisfaction. Psychological Science, 2006. Vol. 17 (2), pp.143—150. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01677.x
  17. Lai L. Maximizing without difficulty: A modified maximizing scale and its correlates. Judgment and Decision Making, 2010. Vol. 5 (3), pp. 164—175.
  18. Liu Y.L., Keeling K.A., Papamichail K.N. Should retail trade companies avoid recruiting maximisers? Management Decision, 2015. Vol. 53 (3), pp. 730—750. doi:10.1108/MD-06-2014-0402
  19. Misuraca R., Faraci P., Gangemi A., Carmeci F.A., Miceli S. The Decision Making Tendency Inventory: A new measure to assess maximizing, satisficing, and minimizing. Personality and Individual Differences, 2015. Vol. 85, pp. 111—116. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.043
  20. Misuraca R., Teuscher U., Carmeci F.A. Who are maximizers? Future oriented and highly numerate individuals. International Journal of Psychology, 2015. Vol. 51 (4), pp. 307—311. doi:10.1002/ijop.12169
  21. Nenkov G., Morrin M., Schwartz B., Ward A., Hulland J. A short form of the Maximization Scale: Factor structure, reliability and validity studies. Judgment and Decision Making, 2008. Vol. 3 (5), pp. 371—388.
  22. Parker A.M., De Bruin W.B., Fischhoff B. Maximizers versus satisficers: Decision-making styles, competence, and outcomes. Judgment and Decision Making, 2007. Vol. 2 (6), pp. 342—350.
  23. Polman E. Why are maximizers less happy than satisficers? Because they maximize positive and negative outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2010. Vol. 23 (2), pp. 179—190. doi:10.1002/bdm.647
  24. Schwartz B., Ward A., Monterosso J., Lyubomirsky S., White K., Lehman D.R. Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002. Vol. 83 (5), pp. 1178—1197. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1178
  25. Turner B.M., Rim H.B., Betz N.E., Nygren T.E. The maximization inventory. Judgment and Decision Making, 2012. Vol. 7 (1), pp. 48—60.

Information About the Authors

Anna Y. Razvaliaeva, PhD in Psychology, Researcher, Laboratory of Cognitive Processes and Mathematical Psychology, Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2046-3411, e-mail: annraz@rambler.ru

Metrics

Views

Total: 2960
Previous month: 66
Current month: 33

Downloads

Total: 2503
Previous month: 29
Current month: 33