Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe emerging judgment and decision‐making literature indicates that individuals use heuristic procedures that simplify cognitive processing requirements. Judgments (particularly subjective probabilities) are based on limited processing of a proper subset of the available evidence. Tasks potentially calling for complex analysis are reduced to heuristic procedures and efficient information processing may result; these heuristics can, however, produce systematic biases and costly errors in judgment.People also exhibit cognitive biases that systematically affect judgments of statistical properties of random variables. The biases appear to be cognitive in nature and therefore are not due entirely to emotional, motivational, or cost‐of‐processing considerations. For some cognitive biases, a possible explanation has been suggested in the context of a heuristic processing procedure.The objective of this paper is to analyze and synthesize the currently available research on cognitive heuristics and information‐processing biases from the perspective of research and actual financial decision situations. Important implications for users and designers of information systems will be discussed. One generic conclusion from the literature is that individuals appear to be inadequate "intuitive" statisticians; a need for formal judgment and decision aids will become clear.

SummaryNeeded Research on Adoption ModelsThis paper outlines the development and present conventional form of the models of adoption. The five stage model of awareness, information, evaluation, trial and adoption, has been logically derived from assumptions about the process by which the human personality develops and how man responds to stimuli received: man is a telic being, an acting being and an organising being. The consequent operational model of adoption is also, for heuristic purposes, presented in five stages although it should not be concluded that the actual processes duplicate this. After dealing with characteristics of practices which affect their adoption, the paper concludes by considering the limitations of the model, and consequently suggesting required research. In particular, the model is too general for universal application, while its emphasis on a process leading to adoption has obscured the significance of optimum adoption and the factors related thereto. More research is also required concerning the detailed nature of each stage.