Police Perfection: Examining the Effect of Trait Maximization on Police Decision-Making

Maximization delays decision-making in acute care nursing

The maximization personality trait refers to the tendency to face decision-making situations along a continuum from exhaustively analysing all the options (maximize) to choosing the one that exceeds a subjective threshold of acceptability (satisfy). Research has revealed the influence of maximizing on decision making, although little is known about its possible role in high risk and high uncertainty situations. A sample of 153 active Spanish nurses, with an average experience of 11 years, completed a maximization questionnaire and responded to written vignettes depicting time-demanding decision making in which three options were offered, representing delayed action, non-action, and immediate action. Two vignettes presented critical situations related to acute care during the COVID-19 pandemic, whilst two vignettes presented non-nursing scenarios. People high in maximization took longer to choose and were more likely to choose non-action. No relationship was found between maximization score and the subjective experience of the person making the choice. Maximization had no significant correlation with years of experience nor perceived expertise. Greater perceived expertise was associated with lower indecision and greater confidence. When participants answered nursing vignettes, they took longer to respond, but chose less delayed action and more immediate action. Our results suggest that maximization plays only a relative role in acute care decision-making in nursing, as compared to contextual variables and expertise. They also support a domain general approach to this personality trait. Findings are consistent with Nibbelink and Reed's Practice-Primed Decision Model for nursing.

Avoidant authority: The effect of organizational power on decision-making in high-uncertainty situations

Individuals in positions of power are often required to make high-stakes decisions. The approach-inhibition theory of social power holds that elevated power activates approach-related tendencies, leading to decisiveness and action orientation. However, naturalistic decision-making research has often reported that increased power often has the opposite effect and causes more avoidant decision-making. To investigate the potential activation of avoidance-related tendencies in response to elevated power, this study employed an immersive scenario-based battery of least-worst decisions (the Least-Worst Uncertain Choice Inventory for Emergency Responses; LUCIFER) with members of the United States Armed Forces. In line with previous naturalistic decision-making research on the effect of power, this research found that in conditions of higher power, individuals found decisions more difficult and were more likely to make an avoidant choice. Furthermore, this effect was more pronounced in domain-specific decisions for which the individual had experience. These findings expand our understanding of when, and in what contexts, power leads to approach vs. avoidant tendencies, as well as demonstrate the benefits of bridging methodological divides that exist between "in the lab" and "in the field" when studying high-uncertainty decision-making.

Yes! Maximizers Maximize Almost Everything: The Decision-Making Style Is Consistent in Different Decision Domains

The decision-making literature distinguishes one maximizing style from another satisficing decision-making style, but it is unknown whether these styles remain stable or are variable depending on the occasion. One way to approach it is to verify eventual generalization of these styles in behavior of people in different decision domains. Some incipient results with University students from the United States and Austria suggest that these styles would remain in three different domains. However, it is unknown if this is the case in adults, other cultures, or vital areas of great relevance, such as health and personal finances. The objective here is to identify if Chilean Latin American participants of different sex and age maintain their decision-making style in five different decision domains. The sample was 343 volunteers, 52.6% men, from two regions of central-southern Chile (Maule and Ñuble), aged between 20 and 90 years (M = 45.47; SD = 16.05), who answered the Maximization Tendency Scale, and 45 items corresponding to five different decision domains: health, life decision, finances, services and experiences, and consumer's good. An apparent coherence of decision-making style-maximizing and satisficing-was obtained in the five domains. The health domain stands out for being the one in which it is maximized and with greater internal homogeneity.

The Effect of a 3-Minute Mindfulness Intervention, and the Mediating Role of Maximization, on Critical Incident Decision-Making

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we extend the impact of mindfulness to the concept of least-worst decision-making. Least-worst decisions involve high-uncertainty and require the individual to choose between a number of potentially negative courses of action. Research is increasingly exploring least-worst decisions, and real-world events (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) show the need for individuals to overcome uncertainty and commit to a least-worst course of action. From sports to business, researchers are increasingly showing that "being mindful" has a range of positive performance-related benefits. We hypothesized that mindfulness would improve least-worst decision-making because it would increase self-reflection and value identification. However, we also hypothesized that trait maximization (the tendency to attempt to choose the "best" course of action) would negatively interact with mindfulness.

METHODS

Three hundred and ninety-eight participants were recruited using Amazon MTurk and exposed to a brief mindfulness intervention or a control intervention (listening to an audiobook). After this intervention, participants completed the Least-Worst Uncertain Choice Inventory for Emergency Responders (LUCIFER).

RESULTS

As hypothesized, mindfulness increased decision-making speed and approach-tendencies. Conversely, for high-maximizers, increased mindfulness caused a slowing of the decision-making process and led to more avoidant choices.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows the potential positive and negative consequences of mindfulness for least-worst decision-making, emphasizing the critical importance of individual differences when considering both the effect of mindfulness and interventions aimed at improving decision-making.

Performance of Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Emergency System in COVID-19 Pandemic. An Extensive Narrative Review

The actual coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to the limit of emergency systems worldwide, leading to the collapse of health systems, police, first responders, as well as other areas. Various ways of dealing with this world crisis have been proposed from many aspects, with fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis being a method that can be applied to a wide range of emergency systems and professional groups, aiming to confront several associated issues and challenges. The purpose of this critical review was to discuss the basic principles, present current applications during the first pandemic wave, and propose future implications of this methodology. For this purpose, both primary sources, such as scientific articles, and secondary ones, such as bibliographic indexes, web pages, and databases, were used. The main search engines were PubMed, SciELO, and Google Scholar. The method was a systematic literature review of the available literature regarding the performance of the fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis of emergency systems in the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study highlight the importance of the fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis method as a beneficial tool for healthcare workers and first responders’ emergency professionals to face this pandemic as well as to manage the created uncertainty and its related risks.