Premium
Decision‐making biases and affective states: their potential impact on best practice innovations
Author(s) -
smith faye l.,
Stone Thomas H.,
Kisamore Jennifer L.,
Jawahar I. M.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
canadian journal of administrative sciences / revue canadienne des sciences de l'administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.347
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 1936-4490
pISSN - 0825-0383
DOI - 10.1002/cjas.132
Subject(s) - representativeness heuristic , heuristics , conceptualization , affect (linguistics) , framing (construction) , overconfidence effect , psychology , persuasion , framing effect , social psychology , management science , cognitive psychology , computer science , economics , artificial intelligence , engineering , communication , structural engineering , operating system
Abstract Contributions from the decision‐making literature concerning biases and heuristics (i.e., anchoring, framing, confirmatory and availability biases, overconfidence, and representativeness) and from the Affect Infusion Model (Forgas, 1995) are integrated into Rogers's (2003) conceptualization of the stages of innovation adoption and diffusion. Specific propositions based on the decision‐making and affect literatures are made in relation to each stage of the innovation process (knowledge of innovation, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation) to better understand the likelihood of a manager making an informed and appropriate decision concerning the adoption and implementation of best practices. Copyright © 2010 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.