Volume 21, Issue 1 (3-2024)
jor 2024, 21(1): 71-92 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Soltani Horand F, Ramazanian M R, Moradi M, Yakideh K. Providing a Framework for Measuring Cognitive Biases in Supply Chain Decisions with Conditions of Uncertainty. jor 2024; 21 (1) :71-92
URL: http://jamlu.liau.ac.ir/article-1-2248-en.html
URL: http://jamlu.liau.ac.ir/article-1-2248-en.html
Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Economic, University of Guilan, Iran , Ramazanian@guilan.ac.ir
Abstract: (964 Views)
Supply chain decisions are always accompanied by a percentage of uncertainty. From environmental uncertainties and uncertainty related to suppliers and customers to the inherent uncertainty of decision-making, they all need attention. Choosing any strategy to manage uncertainty is a decision that, if not optimized, can turn the decision process into an important source of uncertainty. But due to the time and information limitations as well as the cognitive limitations of humans, in many cases, people settle for satisfactory and not optimal decisions by using cognitive heuristics. Heuristics are cognitive shortcuts that can lead to biases. There is no standard tool for measuring biases and cognitive heuristics in supply chain decisions, and therefore no basis for improving supply chain decisions. In the present study, data were collected using a vignette-based tool to measure anchor, accessibility, and representation heuristics. The mechanism of the present tool is such that in each question, participants are exposed to a scenario for making decisions in the face of uncertainty in the supply chain. After studying each scenario, they should state the probability of success of each of the strategies mentioned below in controlling the conditions mentioned in the scenario. This tool was presented in the form of two series of questionnaires, and participants randomly received a specific version of each. The difference between the questions of the two types of questionnaires was only in the way the questions were expressed, one of which was a trigger for cognitive biases and the other was neutral. In each question, only one option (strategy) acted as the target option and was included in the analysis. Participants were selected at different levels of experience, age and gender. The result of the research was the existence of a significant difference between the probability judgments in the two versions of the scenario. Further investigations showed that in the case of anchor and accessibility heuristics, the differences were actually caused by the difference in the type of presenting scenarios, but in the case of representative heuristic, the differences were due to the age difference of the respondents. And the difference in the phrasing of the scenarios had no significant effect.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2023/09/16 | Accepted: 2024/01/26 | Published: 2024/03/20
Received: 2023/09/16 | Accepted: 2024/01/26 | Published: 2024/03/20
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
