Intelligence agents more prone to irrational decision making than students

Bauer, Bond, Salt and their real-life counterparts have ample experience making tough choices between risky options. You'd think this would be a good thing but psychology research shows expertise can backfire when it encourages a short-hand, gist-based approach to problems, rather than a more detail-focused, calculating thinking style. According to researchers at Cornell University, this is what lies behind their demonstration that intelligence officers are more prone to irrationality than students in choosing between risky options. Valerie Reyna and her colleagues presented 63 undergrads, 54 college-educated adults and 36 intelligence officers (77 per cent were special agents; 7 per cent were officers; and 16 per cent were admin) with dozens of decision-making scenarios related to saving human lives. For example: Imagine the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two options were then presented and the participants were asked to decide between them as they would in real life. The options were presented in a way that either emphasised lives to be saved: e.g. Please indicate which option you prefer: a) 200 people saved for sure or (b) 1/3 probability 600 people saved and 2/3 probability no one saved?  Or worded in a way to emphasise lives to be lost: i.e. Please indicate which option you prefer: a) 400 die for sure or (b) 2/3 probability 600 people die and 1/3 probability no one dies? The id...
Source: BPS RESEARCH DIGEST - Category: Psychiatrists and Psychologists Authors: Source Type: blogs