“Either a medal or a corporal”: The effects of success and failure on the evaluation of decision making and decision makers

Abstract

This paper is concerned with judgment by outcomes—justifying decisions and rewarding decision makers in case of success, and condemning both in case of failure. Officers in the Israel Defense Forces evaluated four versions of the same case of decision making in a military setting. In two versions the decision maker obeys his orders, in two he disobeys them to take a normatively appropriate action; one of each decision is successful, one of each fails. Though the cases are identical except for the above differences, successful decisions are considered more justified and to follow from superior decision making processes; decision making processes are perceived as more satisfactory when they lead to success, and successful decision makers are perceived more favorably than their unsuccessful counterparts. Role expectations regarding appropriate action influenced the justification of decisions and perceived favorability of decision makers and interacted with outcome valence in determining the allocation of reward and punishment and the evaluation of the decision making process. The paper discusses implications of the findings to Behavioral Decision Theory, Attribution Theory, and Organizational Learning.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 81 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.