You might want to research some potential sources of bias in decision making.
Some things to consider:
-People often use short-cuts (aka heuristics) in making decisions.
That is, they do not use all of the data available and compute it like
a supercomputer in coming up with probabilities and utilities. Most
economic decision theories had assumed optimality, whereas it is more
likely that people are boundedly rational (i.e. use rationality within
a more narrow framework of knowledge).
-Look at the behavioral models of decision making. Examples:
endowment effect, representativeness heuristic, disposition effect.
-Consider what may happen when a powerful, over-riding voice, by
virtue of some innate qualities, is able to convince a greater number
of individuals to agree. (e.g. a highly vocal juror able to convince
he undecided jurors to one side)
-or the opposite: the 'herd' mentality.
-Consider the limitations of leadership. What might happen when
competing interests are involved, or when people view the world
through very narrow points of view? The bureaucratic politics model,
for example, tells us that "Where you stand is where you sit. " (i.e.
that preferences are determined by where one comes from, what one
does, etc.)
-Consider how organizations limit the range of available options. For
example, many organizations have so-called 'Standard Operating
Procedures' or SOPs. These SOP's may work efficiently a large part of
the time, but not all the time.
-Kahneman and Taversky developed "prospect theory" on the basis of
human biases in perceiving gains and losses. For example, people, when
given two scenarios with equal utilities, will tend to choose the
scenario that has lower losses (even though mathematically the two are
equivalent).
This might be a good place to start. |
