Nav: Home

How looking at the big picture can lead to better decisions

July 13, 2018

COLUMBUS, Ohio - New research suggests how distancing yourself from a decision may help you make the choice that produces the most benefit for you and others affected.

One key to maximizing benefits for everyone is realizing that occasionally the best decision will benefit you the most, said Paul Stillman, lead author of the study who did this work as a postdoctoral researcher in psychology at The Ohio State University.

"The most efficient decision is the one that is going to maximize the total pie - and that is true whether more goes to you or more goes to someone else," said Stillman, who is leaving Ohio State to take a similar position at Yale University. "Sometimes it makes the most sense to seem a bit selfish if that is going to maximize overall benefits."

To make a simple example, it might be more efficient for a software engineer to spend time developing new productivity software rather than fixing a friend's computer. Yes, the engineer may seem selfish by earning money and leaving his friend with a broken computer, but his choice creates more overall value for himself and the future users of his software.

In the study, Stillman and his colleagues found that people tended to make the most efficient decision - the one that resulted in the most overall value for the group - when they looked at the big picture, or saw the forest for the trees.

This "big picture" perspective is what psychologists call "high-level construal" and involves creating psychological distance from the decision. The distance may be time - for example, when you're planning an event for a year from now. Or it may be distant because it involves people who are far away, or because you're considering a hypothetical, rather than real, situation, Stillman said.

"High-level construal allows you to step back and see the consequences of your decision and to see more clearly the best way to allocate resources," he said.

The study appears in the July 2018 issue of the journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

In one experiment, the researchers had 106 students complete a task that prompted them to think in a big-picture way or in a more immediate, present-day way. Participants were presented with the goal of improving health and were asked to generate a list of what goals this could help them achieve, such as "longer life." This puts them in a big-picture frame of mind.

Others were told to come up with a list of how to achieve the goal of improved health, such as "exercise." This put them in a present-day frame of mind.

All participants then played an economic game in which they had to make nine decisions about how to share money between themselves and four other people. They were told that the others wouldn't know who made the decision, and none of the participants could share the money.

For half the participants, maximizing benefits always meant favoring others. For example, for every $1 they gave to themselves in the game, each of the other four people would lose $9. The situation was reversed for the other half of participants - maximizing benefits always meant favoring themselves.

Findings showed that participants who had been prompted to think big picture (high-level construal) were more likely than others to make decisions that would maximize the total value - whether they were the ones who benefited the most or whether the others did.

A second study was similar, but in this case the researchers used a different method to create psychological distance in some of the participants. Half the participants were told that the rewards would be distributed a year from now (which would prompt big-picture thinking) and the other half were told they would be distributed tomorrow (less big-picture thinking).

As in the first study, those participants prompted to think big picture were more likely to choose to maximize total value for the group, whether it benefited them the most or not.

Two other experiments confirmed these findings using different scenarios.

Overall, Stillman said, the results show a way to minimize waste and inefficiencies when making decisions and to maximize net gain for everyone.

"When you create some psychological distance from your decision, you tend to see things more in line with long-term goals, and you can see beyond the immediate considerations of the here and now," he said.
-end-
Other co-authors of the study are Kentaro Fujita, associate professor of psychology at Ohio State; Oliver Sheldon of Rutgers University; and Yaacov Trope of New York University.

The work was funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the Templeton Foundation.

Contact: Paul Stillman, paul.e.stillman@gmail.com

Written by Jeff Grabmeier, 614-292-8457; Grabmeier.1@osu.edu

Ohio State University

Related Decisions Articles:

How neurons use crowdsourcing to make decisions
When many individual neurons collect data, how do they reach a unanimous decision?
Diverse populations make rational collective decisions
Yes/no binary decisions by individual ants can lead to a rational decision as a collective when the individuals have differing preferences to the subject, according to research recently published in the journal Royal Society Open Science.
Understanding decisions: The power of combining psychology and economics
A new paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows how collaborations between psychologists and economists lead to better understanding of such decisions than either discipline can on its own.
Trading changes how brain processes selling decisions
Experience in trading changes how the human brain evaluates the sale of goods, muting an economic bias known as the endowment effect in which people demand a higher price to sell a good than they're willing to pay for it.
Modelling how the brain makes complex decisions
Researchers have built the first biologically realistic mathematical model of how the brain plans and learns when faced with a complex decision-making process.
Focus on treatment decisions: Doctor and patient should decide together
This edition of Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, which focuses on patient involvement, contains two original articles investigating the following questions: do patients benefit from shared decision making?
Surprise: Your visual cortex is making decisions
The part of the brain responsible for seeing is more powerful than previously believed.
Guam research reveals complications of conservation decisions
A Guam native insect impacts a native tree, posing a conundrum for conservationists.
Researchers determine how groups make decisions
Researchers from Carnegie Mellon University have developed a model that explains how groups make collective decisions when no single member of the group has access to all possible information or the ability to make and communicate a final decision.
Physicians should help families with decisions about end-of-life care
About 20 percent of Americans spend time in an intensive care unit around the time of their death, and most deaths follow a decision to limit life-sustaining therapies.

Related Decisions Reading:

Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions
by John S. Hammond (Author), Ralph L. Keeney (Author), Howard Raiffa (Author)

Decision Making Under Uncertainty: Theory and Application (MIT Lincoln Laboratory Series)
by Mykel J. Kochenderfer (Author), Mykel J. Kochenderfer (Contributor), James Ward (Contributor), Christopher Amato (Contributor), Girish Chowdhary (Contributor), Jonathan P. How (Contributor), Hayley J. Davison Reynolds (Contributor), Jason R. Thornton (Contributor), Pedro A. Torres-Carrasquillo (Contributor), N. Kemal Üre (Contributor), John Vian (Contributor)

The Decision Book: 50 Models for Strategic Thinking
by Mikael Krogerus (Author), Roman Tschäppeler (Author), Philip Earnhart (Illustrator), Jenny Piening (Illustrator)

Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work
by Currency

The 6 Most Important Decisions You'll Ever Make: A Guide for Teens: Updated for the Digital Age
by Sean Covey (Author)

Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
by Brian Christian (Author), Tom Griffiths (Author)

Knock Knock Make a Decision Pad
by Knock Knock (Author)

Judgment in Managerial Decision Making
by Max H. Bazerman (Author), Don A. Moore (Author)

Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making (Jossey-bass Business & Management Series)
by Sam Kaner (Author)

Knowledge And Decisions
by Thomas Sowell (Author)

Best Science Podcasts 2018

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2018. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Circular
We're told if the economy is growing, and if we keep producing, that's a good thing. But at what cost? This hour, TED speakers explore circular systems that regenerate and re-use what we already have. Guests include economist Kate Raworth, environmental activist Tristram Stuart, landscape architect Kate Orff, entrepreneur David Katz, and graphic designer Jessi Arrington.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#504 The Art of Logic
How can mathematics help us have better arguments? This week we spend the hour with "The Art of Logic in an Illogical World" author, mathematician Eugenia Cheng, as she makes her case that the logic of mathematics can combine with emotional resonance to allow us to have better debates and arguments. Along the way we learn a lot about rigorous logic using arguments you're probably having every day, while also learning a lot about our own underlying beliefs and assumptions.