COVID-19 has brought our decision-making into significant scrutiny – and in many cases shown us to be lacking in this most underrated and taken for granted skill. Yet, arguably, there has never been a more important moment for us all to be making great decisions.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Against this backdrop, <\/span>this<\/span>\u00a0mixed methods paper, examining the positive effect of a mental simulation intervention on improving group decision outcomes, has just been published<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0open access<\/span>,<\/span>\u00a0in the British Journal of Social Psychology. All authors c<\/span>o<\/span>me from the School of Psychology<\/span>;\u00a0<\/span>Dr Dawn H. Nicholson<\/a>, Dr Tim\u00a0<\/a><\/span>Hopthrow<\/span>, Professor Georgina\u00a0<\/a><\/span>Randsley<\/span>\u00a0de Moura and Dr Giovanni Travaglino<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n The mental simulation – a twist on \u201clet\u2019s pretend\u201d – asks groups to project forward and imagine\u00a0<\/span>that\u00a0<\/span>the decision they are about to make (which is not yet \u2018baked in\u2019) has gone badly wrong. Th<\/span>e<\/span>\u00a0assumption of failure\u00a0<\/span>opens up<\/span>\u00a0the decision-making black box, causing the group to go back and more fully interrogate and challenge the decision and the information underpinning it, resulting in better decision-making outcomes.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c<\/span>This enables new information and thinking to emerge in the group.<\/span>\u201d Dr Nicholson explained<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>\u201c<\/span>Applying this to the decision allows the group to improve their decision-making.<\/span>\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In short, groups who undertook the mental simulation<\/span>\u00a0showed better decision outcomes than those who did not.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c<\/span>Despite much decision-making in the workplace being conducted in groups, research suggests groups don\u2019t always do a good a job when it comes to decision-making \u2013 particularly in certain\u00a0<\/span>scenarios.<\/span>\u201d Nicholson continued \u201c<\/span>This can be down to a variety of factors,\u00a0<\/span>e.g.<\/span>\u00a0who holds what information and how good the group is at sharing and integrating information into the decision-making process, to name but two. This makes it particularly difficult for new and unique information – which may be vital to reaching the best decision – to get into the discussion, let alone be applied to reaching it.<\/span><\/p>\n For a variety of reasons, groups find sharing and integrating information, particularly new information, challenging.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c<\/span>As humans, we like shared information: it makes us feel good. We are \u2018cognitive misers\u2019 \u2013 so we dislike new information because we have to work harder to process it, integrate it and apply it to our decisions. We also rush to make a quick decision, then actively seek out information which confirms that decision, rather than challenges it – we want to prove ourselves right rather than wrong. We also often don\u2019t want to \u2018put our hand up\u2019 with the single piece of disconfirming evidence in case we look\u00a0<\/span>silly, or<\/span>\u00a0turn out\u00a0<\/span>to be\u00a0<\/span>wrong – so we end up ignoring those vital pieces of information. None of this is good for high quality decision-making.<\/span>\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c<\/span>Decision-making is under scrutiny as never before and we need to be making the best decisions. The good news is that the mental simulation is relatively simple and easy to implement.\u00a0<\/span>So<\/span>\u00a0although this research has been tested in a lab, the intervention should be easily applied beyond this.<\/span>\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n You can read the full paper here<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"