thesis about decision making

Decision Making by Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities pp 117–145 Cite as

Theoretical Perspectives on Decision Making

• Ishita Khemka 5  
• First Online: 24 November 2021

954 Accesses

1 Citations

Part of the book series: Positive Psychology and Disability Series ((POPD))

The chapter provides a broad review of theories of decision making, starting from a dominant cognitive view and shifting to more recent emphases on the essential roles of noncognitive factors such as motivation and emotion. The chapter distinguishes between rational and intuitive decision-making approaches and explores this continuum to reveal an overall nuanced understanding of decision processing. A comprehensive review of research studies examining the impact of goal motivations and personal agency beliefs on decision making, and a closer look at the role of affect, emotion, and stress, highlights the numerous influences on decision making and the different pathways decision-makers can use to arrive at satisfactory decision outcomes. With a focus on adolescents and adults in the general population, the chapter also explores the roles of personal and developmental factors in decision making, such as age, gender, personality, individual differences, and social and cultural influences. After establishing a broad theoretical context, the chapter presents an updated version of the Pathways Model of Decision Processing , an exploratory framework for guiding decision-making study and research involving individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

• Dual-process theories
• Bounded rationality
• Decision-making theories
• Decision heuristics
• Goal selection
• Emotion decision processing
• Decision motivation
• Intellectual and developmental disabilities
• Interpersonal decision making

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Adler, N. J. (1991). International dimensions of organization behavior (2nd ed.). PWS-Kent Publishing.

Google Scholar  

Allen, D. (2011). Information behavior and decision making in time-constrained practice: A dual-processing perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 , 2165–2181.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ayal, S., Rusou, Z., Zakay, D., & Hochman, G. (2015). Determinants of judgment and decision-making quality: The interplay between information processing style and situational factors. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , 1088. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01088

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . Freeman.

Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., Nathan DeWall, C., & Zhang, L. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11 (2), 167–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868307301033

Bechara, A., & Damasio, A. R. (2005). The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision. Games and Economic Behavior, 52 (2), 336–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2004.06.010

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Damasio, A., & R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275 (5303), 1293–1295.

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Damasio, A. R., & Lee, G. P. (1999). Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision making. Journal of Neuroscience, 19 (13), 5473–5481. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-13-05473.1999

Boksem, M. A. S., & Tops, M. (2008). Mental fatigue: Costs and benefits. Brain Research Reviews, 59 (1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.07.001

Brake, T., Walker, D. M., & Walker, T. (1995). Doing business internationally: The guide to cross-cultural success . Irwin.

Brown, R. (2004). Consideration of the origin of Herbert Simon’s theory of ‘Satisficing’’ (1933-1947). Management Decision, 42 (10), 1240–1256. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740410568944

Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92 , 938–956. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.938

Byrne, K. A., Peters, C., Hunter, C., Willis, H. C., Phan, D., Cornwall, A., & Worthy, D. A. (2020). Acute stress enhances tolerance of uncertainty during decision making. Cognition, 205 , 104448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104448

Byrnes, J. P. (1998). The nature and development of decision making: A self-regulation model . Erlbaum.

Cauffman, E., Shulman, E., Steinberg, L., Claus, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., et al. (2010). Age differences in affective decision making as indexed by performance on the Iowa Gambling Task. Developmental Psychology, 46 , 193–207.

Choi, I., Koo, M., & Choi, J. (2007). Individual differences in analytic versus holistic thinking. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 33 , 691–705. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206298568

Cohen, A. B. (2009). Many forms of culture. The American Psychologist, 64 (3), 194–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015308

Cross, C. P., Copping, L. T., & Campbell, A. (2011). Sex differences in impulsivity: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137 (1), 97–130. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021591

De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R. J. (2006). Frames, biases, and rational decision making in the human brain. Science, 313 , 684–687.

Delaney, R., Strough, J., Parker, A. M., & de Bruin, W. B. (2015). Variations in decision-making profiles by age and gender: A cluster-analytic approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 85 , 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.034

Diamond, A. (2002). Normal development of prefrontal cortex from birth to young adulthood: Cognitive functions, anatomy, and biochemistry. In D. Stuss & R. Knight (Eds.), Principles of frontal lobe function . Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195134971.003.0029

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64 , 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750

Eagly, A. H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing women and men. American Psychologist, 50 (3), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.145

Etzioni, A. (1988). Normative-affective factors: Toward a new decision-making model. Journal of Economic Psychology, 9 , 125–150.

Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion (Washington, DC), 7 (2), 336–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336

Finucane, M., Mertz, C., Slovic, P., & Schmidt, E. (2005). Task complexity and older adults’ decision-making competence. Psychology and Aging, 20 , 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.20.1.71

Frijda, N. H. (1986). Studies in emotion and social interaction. The emotions . Cambridge University Press; Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.

Galotti, K. M. (2002). Making decisions that matter: How people face important life choices . Erlbaum.

Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., … Yamaguchi, S. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332 , 1100–1104.

George, J. M., & Dane, E. (2016). Affect, emotion, and decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136 , 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.06.004

Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Dread risk, September 11, and fatal traffic accidents. Psychological Science, 15 (4), 286–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00668.x

Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103 (4), 650–669. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.650

Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2001). Rethinking rationality. In G. Gigerenzer & R. Selten (Eds.), Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox (pp. 1–12). The MIT Press.

Gigerenzer, G., Galesic, M., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2013). Stereotypes about Men’s and Women’s intuitions: A study of two nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45 , 62–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022113487074

Gilovich, T., Vallone, R., & Tversky, A. (1985). The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences. Cognitive Psychology, 17 , 295–314.

Glockner, A., & Witteman, C. (2010). Beyond dual-process models: A categorisation of processes underlying intuitive judgment and decision making. Thinking and Reasoning, 16 (1), 1–25.

Gottfredson, L. (1997). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography. Intelligence, 24 (1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90011-8

Greitzer, F. L., Podmore, R., Robinson, M., & Ey, P. (2010). Naturalistic decision making for power system operators. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 26 , 278–291.

Gumpel, T. (1994). Social competence and social skills training for persons with mental retardation: An expansion of behavioral paradigm. Educational and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 29 , 194–201.

Gutnik, L. A., Hakimzada, A. F., Yoskowitz, N. A., & Patel, V. L. (2006). The role of emotion in decision making: A cognitive neuroeconomic approach towards understanding sexual risk behavior. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 39 (6), 720–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2006.03.002

Haier, R. J. (2016). The neuroscience of intelligence . Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U., & the ABC Research Group. (2013). Simple heuristics in a social world . Oxford University Press.

Hickson, L., & Khemka, I. (1999). Decision making and mental retardation. In L. M. Glidden (Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 22, pp. 227–265). Academic Press.

Hickson, L., & Khemka, I. (2001). The role of motivation in the decision making of people with mental retardation. In H. N. Switzky (Ed.), Personality and motivational differences in persons with mental retardation (pp. 199–256). Erlbaum.

Hickson, L., & Khemka, I. (2013). Problem solving and decision making. In M. Wehmeyer (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of positive psychology and disability . Oxford University Press.

Hickson, L., & Khemka, I. (2014). The psychology of decision making. In R. Hodapp (Ed.), International review of research in developmental disabilities (Vol. 47, pp. 185–229). Elsevier.

Hoch, S. J., & Loewenstein, G. F. (1991). Time inconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 17 , 492–507.

Hockey, G. R. J. (2011). A motivational control theory of cognitive fatigue. In P. L. Ackerman (Ed.), Decade of behavior/science conference. Cognitive fatigue: Multidisciplinary perspectives on current research and future applications (pp. 167–187). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12343-008

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2 (1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014

Hunt, E. (2011). Human intelligence . Cambridge University Press.

Izard, C. E. (2009). Emotion theory and research: Highlights, unanswered questions, and emerging issues. Annual Review of Psychology, 60 , 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163539

Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment . The Free Press.

Juliusson, E. A., Karlsson, N., & Gärling, T. (2005). Weighing the past and the future in decision making. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17 (4), 561–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440440000159

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow . Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American Psychologist, 64 (6), 515–526.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47 (2), 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185

Khemka, I., & Hickson, L. (2006). The role of motivation in the decision making of adolescents with mental retardation. In L. M. Glidden & H. N. Switzky (Eds.), International review of research in mental retardation, volume 31 . Elsevier.

Khemka, I., & Hickson, L. (2017). The role of positive psychology in interpersonal decision making. In K. A. Shogren, M. Wehmeyer, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in intellectual and developmental disabilities: Translating research into practice (pp. 145–171). Springer.

Klein, G. (1997). The recognition-primed decision (RPD) model: Looking back, looking forward. In C. E. Zsambok & G. A. Klein (Eds.), Naturalistic decision making (pp. 131–140). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Klein, G. (1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions . MIT Press.

Klein, G. (2008). Naturalistic decision making. Human Factors, 50 (3), 456–460. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288385

Klein, G. (2009). Streetlights and shadows: Searching for the keys to adaptive decision making . MIT Press.

Kruglanski, A. W. (1996a). Motivated social cognition: Principles of the interface. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 493–520). The Guilford Press.

Kruglanski, A. W. (1996b). A motivated gatekeeper of our minds. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition . Guilford.

Kruglanski, A. W. (1996c). Goals as knowledge structures. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 599–618). Guilford Press.

Kuhl, J. (1986). Motivation and information processing: A new look at decision making, dynamic change, and action control. In M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior . Guilford.

Lam, C. L. M., Leung, C. J., Yiend, J., & Lee, T. M. C. (2020). The implication of cognitive processes in emotional bias. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 114 , 156–157.

Leprohon, J., & Patel, V. L. (1995). Decision making strategies for telephone triage in emergency medical services. Medical Decision making, 15 , 240–253.

Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 66 (1), 799–823.

Loewenstein, G. (1996). Out of control: Visceral influences on behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65 , 272–292. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0028

Loewenstein, G. F., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57 (3), 426–441. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.3.426

Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127 (2), 267–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267

Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982). Regret theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. The Economic Journal, 92 , 805–824.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98 (2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224

Martin, L., & Delgado, M. R. (2011). The influence of emotion regulation on decision making under risk. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23 (9), 2569–2581.

Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41 (1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734

Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., et al. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51 , 77–101.

Nelissen, R. M. A., Dijker, A. J. M., & De Vries, N. K. (2007). Emotions and goals: Assessing relations between values and emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 21 (4), 902–911. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930600861330

Newell, B. R., Lagnado, D. A., & Shanks, D. R. (2015). Straight choices: The psychology of decision making . Psychology Press.

O’Brien, L., Albert, D., Chein, J., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Adolescents prefer more immediate rewards when in the presence of their peers. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21 , 747–753.

Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128 (1), 3–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3

Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999). The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 (6), 972–987. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.972

Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. L. (1993). The adaptive decision maker . Cambridge University Press.

Poon, K. (2018). Hot and cool executive functions in adolescence: Development and contributions to important developmental outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 , 2311.

Prencipe, A., Kesek, A., Cohen, J., Lamm, C., Lewis, M., & David, Z. (2011). Development of hot and cool executive function during the transition to adolescence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108 (3), 621–637.

Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning and Individual Differences, 7 (1), 1–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/1041-6080(95)90031-4

Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2011). Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: A fuzzy-trace model. Developmental Review, 31 , 180–206.

Reyna, V. F., & Zayas, V. (2014). The neuroscience of risky decision making . American Psychological Association.

Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5 (4), 296–320. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2.S2CID4987502

Sagi, A., & Friedland, N. (2007). The cost of richness: The effect of the size and diversity of decision sets on post-decision regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (4), 515–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.515

Schaie, K. W., & Willis, S. L. (2002). Adult development and aging (5th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Schwartz, B., Ben-Haim, Y., & Dacso, C. (2011). What makes a good decision? Robust satisficing as a normative standard of rational decision making. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41 (2), 209–227.

Selten, R. (2001). What is bounded rationality? In G. Gigerenzer & R. Selten (Eds.), Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox (pp. 13–36). The MIT Press.

Shah, J. Y., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2000). Aspects of goal networks: Implications for self regulation. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp. 85–110). Academic.

Shah, A. K., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134 (2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.207 . Simon’s (1967, 1983).

Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63 (2), 129–138.

Simon, H. A. (1967). Motivational and emotional controls of cognition. Psychological Review, 74 (1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0024127

Simon, H. A. (1983). Reason in human affairs . Stanford University Press.

Solomon, R. C. (1993). The passions: Emotions and the meaning of life . Hackett.

Stanovich, K. E. (2010). Decision making and rationality in the modern world . Oxford University Press.

Stanovich, K. E. (2011). Rationality and the reflective mind . Oxford University Press.

Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2017). The rationality quotient . MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262034845.001.0001

Starcke, K., & Brand, M. (2012). Decision making under stress: A selective review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36 , 1228–1248.

Steinberg, L. (2010). A dual systems model of adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Psychobiology, 52 , 216–224.

Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, S. B. (Eds.). (2011). Cambridge handbook of intelligence . Cambridge University Press.

ten Brinke, L., Lee, J. J., & Carney, D. (2019). Physiological reactions when observing lies and truths: Evidence and an intervention to enhance accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117 , 560–578. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000175

Toda, M. (1980). Emotion in decision making. Acta Psychologica, 45 , 133–155.

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2017). Real-world correlates of performance on heuristics and biases tasks in a community sample. Journal of Behavioral Decision making, 30 , 541–554. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1973

Triandis, H. C. (2004). The many dimensions of culture. Academy of Management Executive, 18 , 88–93. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.2004.12689599

van den Bos, R., Homberg, J., & de Visser, L. (2013). A critical review of sex differences in decision making tasks, focus on the Iowa Gambling Task. Behavioral Brain Research, 238 , 95–108.

Varnum, M. E., Grossmann, I., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2010). The origin of cultural differences in cognition: Evidence for the social orientation hypothesis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19 (1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359301

Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion . Springer-Verlag.

Weller, J., Ceschi, A., Hirsch, L., Sartori, R., & Costantini, A. (2018). Accounting for individual differences in decision-making competence: Personality and gender differences. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 , 2258. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02258

Yates, J. F., & de Oliveira, S. (2016). Culture and decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136 , 106–118.

Yuan, J., Tian, Y., Huang, X., Fan, H., & Wei, X. (2019). Emotional bias varies with stimulus type, arousal and task setting: Meta-analytic evidences. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 107 , 461–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.09.035

Zeelenberg, M., Nelissen, R., Breugelmans, S., & Pieters, R. (2008). On emotion specificity in decision making: Why feeling is for doing. Judgment and Decision making, 3 , 18–27.

Zelazo, P. D., & Carlson, S. M. (2012). Hot and cool executive function in childhood and adolescence: Development and plasticity. Child Development Perspectives, 6 (4), 354–360.

Zelazo, P. D., Carlson, S. M., & Kesek, A. (2008). Development of executive function in childhood. In C. A. Nelson & M. Luciana (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (2nd ed., pp. 553–574). MIT Press.

Zhao, J. (2006) The Effects of Induced Positive and Negative Emotions on Risky Decision making. Talk Presented at the 28th Annual Psychological Society of Ireland Student Congress, Maynooth, May 2006, 22 p.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

St. John’s University, Queens, NY, USA

Ishita Khemka

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ishita Khemka .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Education, St. John‘s University, Queens, NY, USA

Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Linda Hickson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Khemka, I. (2021). Theoretical Perspectives on Decision Making. In: Khemka, I., Hickson, L. (eds) Decision Making by Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Positive Psychology and Disability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74675-9_6

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74675-9_6

Published : 24 November 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-74674-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-74675-9

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking Essay

Decision making is a process of choosing a course of action in case of doubt. Problem solving is a part of decision making and deals with analyzing a difficulty. Unlike problem solving, decision making does not necessarily eliminate the root problem (Marquis & Huston, 2017). Critical thinking is a mental process of analyzing and evaluating information to reach conclusion. It is more complex than decision making or problem solving and includes intuition, insight, and other cognitive components.

The tool chosen for the purpose of hiring new personnel is the Decision Grid. As the purpose of the task is to use objective criteria, it must all be presented before the decision is made. The simplest way of presenting objective information is comparing all of the potential RNs with identical criteria. Those with the most favorable indicators will then be hired. The criteria used will be: academic performance, the characteristic from school, the previous work experience as a nurse, the distance between the nursing department and the RN’s home, and whether the student has personal transport.

For helping the new employees to orient and socialize, two models will be used. The Nursing Process model will be used for all personnel, while the Intuitive Decision-Making model will only be used for the experienced staff. Nursing Process is used because it is known for its feedback capabilities, and feedback is necessary considering that it was skipped during hiring in favor of objective criteria (Marquis & Huston, 2017). Intuitive Decision-Making Models must not be used by the new RNs as they lack experience, but the experienced nurses may demonstrate by example what the new hirelings will be capable of later. The Tools used for this task are Decision Trees and Consequence Tables. As there is no need for direct comparison, it is more important to demonstrate tools which will show actions and their consequences and will therefore help the new hires on the fly.

There are many problems which are commonly encountered by nurses on their workplaces. For example, qualified nurses have to overwork, making them tired and prone to mistakes. Why do qualified nurses have to overwork and become tired? Because new personnel tend to make medication errors caused by small details such as drugs having similar names or poor documentation work. Why do they make these mistakes, however small they may seem? Because nursing stations often lack qualified personnel. Why do they lack qualified personnel among their employees? Because there is a low retention rate in the profession. Why is there a low retention rate in the profession? Because the profession needs more dedicated nurses who will remain in the profession. Why is there a need for more dedicated professional nurses? Because more vacancies in nursing schools are needed, along with new marketing strategies, which will increase revenue and will, consequently, attract more talent. As for mistakes with similar drugs, they can be remedied by creating an internal coding system which is used in distributing drugs, and by encouraging nurses to consult with each other.

A different problem is that patients in hospitals tend to suffer infections, first contracting them there. Why do they tend to suffer infections despite being in a hospital? Because nurses spread the infections in hospitals, visiting multiple patients per day on a regular basis. Why do nurses spread infections when it is their duty to provide healthcare? Because they lack sufficient sterile equipment which would stop them from contacting infected patients. Why do they lack sterile equipment even though it is necessary to protect patients? Because hospitals are underfunded and cannot afford sterile equipment which can protect from every infection. Thus, it may be generally concluded that nurses need more thorough and available education, and to receive better funding.

Marquis, B. L. & Huston, C. J. (2017). Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: Theory and Application (9th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, August 17). Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking. https://ivypanda.com/essays/decision-making-problem-solving-and-critical-thinking/

"Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking." IvyPanda , 17 Aug. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/decision-making-problem-solving-and-critical-thinking/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking'. 17 August.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking." August 17, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/decision-making-problem-solving-and-critical-thinking/.

1. IvyPanda . "Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking." August 17, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/decision-making-problem-solving-and-critical-thinking/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Decision Making, Problem Solving, and Critical Thinking." August 17, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/decision-making-problem-solving-and-critical-thinking/.

• Emergency Medical Care and Nursing Overwork
• Facility Guidelines Institute Requirements for Sterile Processing Facilities
• Overwork vs. Shortened Workweek
• Overwork: Why People Should Have Shorter Workweeks
• The Sterile Cockpit: Medication Errors Prevention
• Sterile Service Department Process Mapsterile Service Department Process Map
• Researching of Aseptic Technique
• When to Standard Precautions Over Sterile Precautions While Taking Care of Patients
• High Risk of HIV Among Injection Drug Users
• Leadership and Intuitive Decision-Making
• The Doctor of Nursing Practice Role
• Redefining “Time” to Meet Evolving Demands
• The Role of Advanced Practice Nurses
• Reducing Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections
• Social Cognitive Theory as Health Promotion Model

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Identifying the factors affecting strategic decision-making ability to boost the entrepreneurial performance: a hybrid structural equation modeling – artificial neural network approach.

• 1 School of Economics and Management, Harbin University, Harbin, China
• 2 School of Economics, Harbin University of Commerce, Harbin, China
• 3 Department of Finance, Harbin University, Harbin, China
• 4 Faculty of Business Management and Study, Nazeer Hussain University, Karachi, Pakistan

This study builds a conceptual model of strategic decision-making ability that leads to entrepreneurial performance (EP) based on the two-system decision-making theory and logical analysis. An empirical approach using structural equation modeling – artificial neural network (SEM-ANN) was performed to describe the linear and nonlinear relationships in the proposed model. The empirical results reveal that strategic decision-making abilities are affected by five factors: attention, memory, thinking, emotion, and sentiment, and whose influence mechanisms and degrees are varied. Results also describe that these abilities have a positive effect on overall EP. Therefore, results suggest that businesses’ strategic decision-making is usually strengthened when entrepreneurs have a clear understanding of these influencing elements, and the interaction between them leads to improved performance.

Introduction

Entrepreneurship is thought to be a means of performance and wealth development. With the information economy expanding so quickly, knowledge-based decision-making is seen as a key tool for success and prosperity ( Yang et al., 2018 ; Jiatong et al., 2021a ). The key factor influencing the performance and profitability of organizations is strategic decision-making ( Feng et al., 2022 ). Because, the willingness to take risks and make decisions, as well as organizational product invention and market innovation, are all linked to an individual’s entrepreneurial performance (EP) ( Li et al., 2020a ). Furthermore, there is a correlation between value creation and creative thinking, recognition of opportunities, as well as time, resources, risk, and other components sof strategic decision-making and EP ( Theriou and Chatzoudes, 2015 ; Li et al., 2020a ). In the current green environmental pressure, businesses must prospectively include competitive issues into their strategic plans to build innovative initiatives and achieve a foothold in the extremely competitive business world ( Abbas, 2020 ). Research showed that managers’ decision-making skill affects the organization’s innovative strategies. It is indeed important to research what affects and improves managers’ decision-making ability ( Pan et al., 2020 ).

Since the 21st century began, organizational culture has integrated IT and industries ( Shahzad et al., 2017 ; Agarwala and Chaudhary, 2021 ). Strategic decisions to engage in innovation are significantly influenced by global technological growth, which produces new patterns of doing business ( Xu et al., 2022 ). To increase management decision-making ability, enterprises should optimize the governance system, raise development awareness, design development plans based on long-term sustainable growth, and encourage enterprise strategy execution ( Feng et al., 2022 ; Hu et al., 2022 ; Wang and Liu, 2022 ). Furthermore, strategic decision-making behavior requires organizations to match the external environment and internal resource capabilities; however, most are constrained by internal resources and are unable to develop flexible strategies ( Li et al., 2020b ). Several studies use cognitive-behavioral theory to evaluate cognitive behavior, claiming that it is critical to organizational decision-making, especially in the fields of entrepreneurship, technology adoption decisions, social media, and consumer behavior ( Dwivedi et al., 2017 ; Chou et al., 2020 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). Strategic decision-making has not been linked to EP in previous research. Therefore, to fill a research void in organizational psychology, this study examines the factors that influence an entrepreneur’s abilities to make strategic decisions that ultimately lead to enhanced EP.

In a new current theory, behavioral change is used as a proxy for success or failure, and cognitive and affective aspects can be investigated as predictors of decision-making quality ( Feng et al., 2022 ). The level of cognitive acuity not only allows for more information sharing but also reduces the stress of controversy ( Kang and Lee, 2017 ). In a similar vein, as the importance of being able to make strategic decisions as an entrepreneur has increased, the study of such talents has attracted a significant amount of interest in both academic and business communities ( Bilancini et al., 2019 ). The link between influencing factors and the ability to make strategic decisions is complex because strategic decision-making involves a cognitive and psychological transformation process ( Narayanan et al., 2011 ). However, because the model is excessively complex, parameters are difficult to estimate, a huge amount of work is required, and the model is unstable, it is difficult to implement in practice ( Kaplan, 2011 ). Therefore, it is also essential to determine whether the main factors that influence strategic decision-making are linear or non-linear in their interaction with one another to steer the EP. The research aims to establish a linear and nonlinear model between a particular aspect and strategic decision-making ability. SEM and ANN are used to express nonlinear relationships between variables and have excellent self-learning abilities. Academics have given little attention to research structure due to its complexity. Lack of research hinders the establishment of a thorough research system to determine the impact on strategic decision-making.

The performance of entrepreneurial enterprises is the output of entrepreneurial activities at the organizational level and an important embodiment of entrepreneurial success. Although entrepreneurs have unique entrepreneurial advantages, their EP is uneven in the face of the dual uncertainties of the market and technology. The environment of an enterprise is characterized by dynamic, uncertain, and complex characteristics, rather than being in a static and stable state. Enterprises need to realize adaptability between their resources and their pursued opportunities according to their environment and develop a strategic plan that can best match external environmental opportunities with internal resources. Adaptation of a strategy is a process of “matching” or “matching the organizational resources” with the opportunities of the environment ( Ruobing et al., 2022 ). At present, there is a lack of relevant reasons in the academic circle, and only the difference in creativity characteristics during entrepreneurship is regarded as the influencing factor ( Jiatong et al., 2021b ; Xie et al., 2021 ), but the creativity characteristics are more the external expression of technical ability and transfer of knowledge ( Zhou et al., 2021 ), which do not reflect the personal characteristics that affect the major decision-making and management of enterprises. Therefore, the key research questions of this study are framed as (1) What are the cognitive and affective factors that affect strategic decision-making abilities? (2) What is the impact of strategic decision-making abilities on EP? This research conclusion can be filling the research gap in organizational psychology, and provide countermeasures and suggestions for the improvement of enterprise EP.

Literature review and hypotheses development

Enterprise strategic decision-making ability combines many ability factors. The research on strategic decision-making ability focuses on the composition of strategic decision-making ability and the factors that influence it ( Wally and Baum, 1994 ; Bilancini et al., 2019 ). According to the literature, strategic decision-making ability encompasses three abilities: first, the capacity to locate, predict and capture strategic opportunities by assessing the environment. Second, is the ability to make strategic decisions such as setting a goal and deciding on a business strategy. The third step is to integrate resources by selecting, acquiring, and utilizing resources ( Milliken and Vollrath, 1991 ; Wally and Baum, 1994 ). The study by Schønning et al. (2019) believes the strategic decision-making ability system has three dimensions: strategy analysis, strategy selection, and optimization, and adaptive and updating capacity. All elements work together to develop and perfect strategic decision-making. By carefully studying rational decision-making variables, a comprehensive and workable driving model is created ( Spanuth et al., 2020 ).

Furthermore, enhancing a person’s capacity for strategic decision-making allows one to better understand both the environment’s special traits and the ever-changing trend ( Bilancini et al., 2019 ). Strategic decision-making, especially in the realm of environmental sustainability, is the focus of academic research ( Bilancini et al., 2019 ). Since demographic characteristics are mostly related to human capital and theoretical explanations are limited, scholars have begun to study the impact of entrepreneurial and executive team characteristics on the quality of strategic decision-making ( Friedman and Carmeli, 2018 ; Feng et al., 2022 ). There is evidence from prior research suggesting a link between the aggression, core self-evaluation, and strategic decision-making abilities of the senior management team ( Clohessy and Acton, 2019 ; Gao et al., 2021 ).

Recently, there has been intense interest in how the psychological makeup of decision-makers affects their ability to make sound strategic choices. The cognitive approach, complexity, requirements, and variation are the primary intellectual considerations ( Forbes, 2007 ; Nadkarni and Narayanan, 2007 ). When seen from a cognitive viewpoint, the strategic decision-making process consists of three stages: environment scanning, interpretation, and action ( Kumbure et al., 2020 ). In this research, we break the capability of making strategic decisions down into three categories: scanning, interpretation, and action ability. The capability to scan the environment for crucial information. The aptitude to make insightful and original sense of the data one has gathered. The capacity for logical appraisal and judgment, followed by the selection of appropriate actions in response to the environment, is what we mean when we talk of behavioral ability ( Li et al., 2019 ).

Both an analytical, rational decision-making system and a heuristic, empirical system have been advocated in decision-making circles ( Bryant, 2007 ; Shukla et al., 2019 ). The former is slow because it needs your brain to do the heavy lifting of applying logic rules and calculating probabilities. Cognition also plays a significant role in this process, as it is a form of decision-making. The latter make snappier judgments because of less deliberate engagement and the use of prior experience or logical associations. It follows that the ability of strategic decision-making is constrained not only by the cognitive aspects of decision-makers but also by cannot to resist the influence of emotional variables ( Shahzad et al., 2022 ).

Cognitive factors

The term “cognitive ability” is used to describe a person’s innate and fundamental intellectual function. This includes the person’s capacity for learning, reasoning, and communication ( Chou et al., 2020 ). In theory, one’s logical prowess influences their decision to go out on their own. Furthermore, co-creation processes will aid in the development of better decisions ( Anugrah and Hermawan, 2019 ). Individuals with higher cognitive abilities may foresee market conditions and trends more accurately, and they are frequently able to respond to rapidly changing markets in a timely and suitable manner ( Bilancini et al., 2019 ). Attention, memory, and ideation are the most important cognitive factors. Through the selection and understanding of the development trend of things from a strategy perspective, a decision-maker with strong attention can receive rich information while ensuring objectivity and comprehensiveness of information ( Brosch et al., 2013 ). A keen eye can also detect the drawbacks of strategic decision-making in real time and alter and change it in response to information input from its implementation ( Jugovac and Cavallero, 2012 ). Simultaneously, attentiveness can assist in capturing the best chance for strategic judgments and ensuring the best return from strategic decisions ( Sabet et al., 2017 ). Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed in this research:

H1a: Attention has a positive effect on scanning ability. H1b: Attention has a positive effect on interpretation ability. H1c: Attention has a positive effect on action ability.

Memory is the ability to remember things. Memory’s accuracy and persistence provide quick, quality decisions. Before conveying the input to the target language audience, it must be kept in long-term memory in the source language ( Yenkimaleki and van Heuven, 2017 ). Memory can store information and conclusions. When facing similar issues, it might leverage previous knowledge ( Stocco et al., 2018 ). Strategic decision-making is memory-based. Strong-memory strategic decision-makers can accurately repeat valuable knowledge, enhancing decision-making efficiency and degree ( Fechner et al., 2016 ). The large and deep network of information may help or traumatize employees’ sustainable innovation performance ( Wang et al., 2018 ; Wiseman et al., 2022 ), which becomes part of their memory. A good memory can provide strategic decision-making concepts, processes, approaches, insights, and lessons ( Bechara and Martin, 2004 ). Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed in this research:

H2a: Memory has a positive effect on scanning ability. H2b: Memory has a positive effect on interpretation ability. H2c: Memory has a positive effect on action ability.

Ideation involves analyzing, synthesizing, reasoning, and judging based on perception. All decision-making plans and ideas are the results of mental processing ( Del Missier et al., 2015 ). Ideation-based explanations are independent of systems and tactics to generate ideas, such as leverage points as generation seeds. Strategically manipulating associative memory involves focusing on substructures ( Barbot, 2018 ).

Strategic decisions are constantly based on social, political, and economic situations. It’s done by analysis, synthesis, comparison, abstraction, and generalization, according to social-psychological demands ( Heidari and Ebrahimi, 2016 ). Analysis and prediction of variable components in strategic decision-making depend on ideation, and ideation cannot be separated from other elements that drive strategic decision-making ( Griessenberger et al., 2012 ). Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed in this research:

H3a: Ideation has a positive effect on scanning ability. H3b: Ideation has a positive effect on interpretation ability. H3c: Ideation has a positive effect on action ability.

Affective factors

Affective factors are classified into two types: low-level, namely emotion, and high-level, or sentiment. Positive or negative emotions characterize people. Positive emotions inspire decision-makers to work hard and be entrepreneurial. In this scenario, strategic decision-making establishes a higher aim, and the tools to achieve it are stable and complete ( Treffers et al., 2020 ). While strategic decision-making in a negative emotional state reduces the decision-making goal and its measurements ( Shukla et al., 2019 ). In a catastrophe, we should be calm, positive, and sensible. Before significant decisions, we should restrict emotional reactions, establish a good group decision-making environment, and enhance cohesiveness ( Zhang et al., 2015 ). When people are overexcited, the brain’s exciting points are concentrated in one area and the other regions temporarily lose contact. Logic is almost lost, which hinders strategic decision-making ( Shukla et al., 2019 ).

H4a: Emotion has a positive effect on scanning ability. H4b: Emotion has a positive effect on interpretation ability. H4c: Emotion has a positive effect on action ability.

The sentiment is a sophisticated, rational, steady, high-level feeling that combines emotion, and ethics. It has a normative role in people’s behavior and is the inner incentive for heroic activity ( Kauffmann et al., 2019 ). Sentiment influences decision-making as a high-level emotion and social conduct including strategic decision-making. Moral decision-makers assess the impact of their decisions on the group, others, and society, not only on themselves ( Morente-Molinera et al., 2019 ). Novel-minded decision-makers can relinquish their interests, restrain their impulses, and focus on group unity and societal impact in entrepreneurial strategic decision-making that may lead to enhanced performance ( Sun et al., 2021 ). Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed in this research:

H5a: Sentiment has a positive effect on scanning ability. H5b: Sentiment has a positive effect on interpretation ability. H5c: Sentiment has a positive effect on action ability.

The influence of strategic decision-making ability on entrepreneurial performance

The strategy formulation of entrepreneurial enterprises regards the external environment as an important part of the strategic decision-making process ( Chen, 2022 ). The scientific understanding of the environment, the accurate understanding of the characteristics, and changing trends of the environment, and seeking the best entrepreneurial path are the key to the success of the enterprise ( Zhou and Wu, 2018 ; Xi et al., 2019 ). Decision-makers with strong environmental scanning ability can collect more comprehensive internal and external related information about the enterprise, which is also conducive to interacting with external stakeholders, obtaining strategic information, and constantly reducing information bias through information supplement and correction ( Hongjia et al., 2010 ; Wang and Xu, 2019 ). Policymakers with strong interpersonal abilities can have a scientific understanding of the external competition, and economic, financial, and legal environment ( Sarker and Palit, 2014 ). Decision-makers with strong action ability can design more strategic decision-making plans. Provide a diverse perspective for policymakers to evaluate strategic programs. Through the discussion, the decision-makers can evaluate the technological innovation strategic solutions comprehensively and objectively and ensure that high-quality solutions are selected from the numerous technological innovation strategic solutions ( Yuetong, 2022 ). Therefore, strong strategic decision-making ability can make a suitable outline for enterprises in development and innovation. It points out the development direction of enterprises, guides entrepreneurial activities, and supervises the performance of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship for a long time. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed in this research:

H6a: Scanning ability has a positive effect on EP. H6b: Interpretation ability has a positive effect on EP. H6c: Action ability has a positive effect on EP.

The conceptual model is presented here in Figure 1 .

Figure 1. Conceptual model.

Methodology

Selection of the study methods.

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) has the advantage of simultaneously observing the relationship between variables and latent variables and the relationship between latent variables and latent variables and can also eliminate random measurement errors. Therefore, more accurate results can be obtained compared to the traditional regression analysis. Although the SEM method is widely used in empirical analysis research, only the linear relationship between the variables is considered in the analysis, which restricts its application depth. In order to make up for this defect of SEM, some scholars try to add interaction terms or quadratic terms to reflect the nonlinear relationship between variables ( Tuu and Olsen, 2010 ), but the SEM model after adding interaction or quadratic terms is too complex, has poor computation, stability, and large parameter estimation is difficult disadvantages, making this method is difficult to be widely used in practice. Artificial Neural Network (ANN) can realize function approximation, data clustering, mode classification, optimization calculation, and other functions, and can automatically adjust the connection weight between the network nodes to fit the non-linear relationship of variables ( Pasini, 2015 ). Applying ANN models can find complex linear and nonlinear associations between variables. Moreover, ANN models can perform more accurate predictions compared to linear analysis methods. However, the current topology structure of the current ANN model is mainly determined based on experience, and the neuronal nodes are often fully connected, which leads to the lack of a theoretical explanation of the path and degree of the influence between variables and neurons.

From the above analysis, we show that SEM is more flexible in reflecting causal relationships between variables than ANN but has limitations of difficulty to handle non-nonlinear relationships among variables. However, the ANN model can approximate the nonlinear relationship between the variables, and it poorly explains the input variable to influence the path and the degree of the output variable. To this end, we use a modeling approach combining SEM and ANN to test the series of hypotheses and theoretical models proposed in the paper. Structural equation-based model testing is performed using structural equation models as parameter estimation and hypothesis testing techniques to obtain the path of influence between variables. The SEM is based on the topology of the model and the structured ANN model according to the test results of the structural equation model.

Analysis method of structural equation modeling

Structural Equation Modeling consists of a measurement model and a structural model. The measurement model analyses the link between an observed variable and a latent variable through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Three matrices represent SEM.

Equations (1, 2) are measurement models, X and Y represent observed variable vectors; Λx and Λy represent factor load matrix; ξ and η represent latent variable vectors; δ and ε represent measurement error vectors. Equation (3) is the structural model, B represents the “effect coefficient matrix of endogenous latent variables on endogenous latent variables,” Γ the “effect coefficient matrix of exogenous latent variables on endogenous latent variables,” and the residual items vector. Absolute and relative fitting indexes evaluate model fit. Model fit indexes are over 0.90, indicating that the data are well-fitted. The closer to 1, the better the model’s fit.

Analysis method of structural equation modeling – artificial neural network

The SEM results determine the SEM-ANN topology. Widely utilized in the research of nonlinear issues, it may fit the relationship between variables by altering the weights of connections between network nodes ( Foo et al., 2018 ; Shahzad et al., 2020 ). However, ANN topology is mostly determined by experience, and neurons are frequently connected. The model does not explain input and output variables, impact path, or degree between neurons. When ANN and SEM are integrated, SEM’s topology design determines the influence path of elements on strategic decision-making ability. ANN’s nonlinear mapping and self-learning abilities are utilized to fit the causal link among various elements. This overcomes linear and SEM parameter estimation difficulties and improves ANN’s topological structure. In this paper, SEM and ANN are used to model strategic decision-making ability.

Backpropagation (BP) neural networks are multi-layer feed-forward networks trained using error BP. BP trains the nodes’ connection weights. The BP algorithm separates forward and back propagation ( Tan et al., 2014 ). Forwarding propagation transfers the input sample signal from the input layer to the output layer. The number of extraneous variables determines input layer nodes. The connection between networks is determined by measurement variables and potential variables, and node connection weight is generated by load and path coefficient ( Shahzad et al., 2021 ). It calculates output error based on actual and expected output, distributes it to all layer nodes to obtain each node’s error signal, and uses this to alter weight. After the changes, forward propagation is reprocessed, and network output error is reduced. MSE and R 2 measure algorithm accuracy. Less MSE means higher algorithm accuracy. R 2 around 1 indicates a stronger model interpretation.

Experiments

Variables measurements and data source.

The measures of attention typically refer back to work by Jugovac and Cavallero (2012) regarding attentional focus, focus stability, focus allocation, and focus transfer. As far as how memory is evaluated, most people look to studies conducted by Luber et al. (2013) on memory speed, memory stamina, and memory correctness. Specifically, the work of Campos-Blázquez et al. (2020) is cited as a primary source for determining how to quantify agility, flexibility, and depth of thought in the realm of ideation. In terms of tolerance, optimism, melancholy, and rage, the studies of Goldstein et al. (2013) are the most frequently cited when discussing the quantification of emotional states. Kazmaier and van Vuuren’s (2020) work on measuring morality, responsibility, and reason plays a significant role in the field. Scanning proficiency is evaluated based on how quickly, cheaply, and effectively it can gather information ( Thomas et al., 2009 ).

According to Autier and Picq (2005) the ability to interpret information about one’s external environment, internal resources and capabilities, strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats, are the key factors in evaluating a person’s level of interpretive ability. The work of Ruigrok et al. (2006) is most often cited when discussing the many approaches, breadth of evaluations, and precision of selection available for gauging action ability. The measures of EP refer back to work by Baoshan et al. (2009) , from the financial indicators and non-financial indicators of two aspects, regarding cash assets, return on investment, Interest rate, return on assets, and a number of new product items. This paper adopts the following two ways of getting data: the first is to obtain the help of local government departments, send the electronic questionnaire via e-mail and collect it by mail; the second is to fill in the paper questionnaire and collect it on the spot. A total of 1,500 questionnaires were sent out, 1,247 were returned, and 1,126 were considered for analysis after removing those with unengaged responses, missing data, and other issues. The significance level for the independent sample t -test was 0.498 (>0.05), indicating that there was no discernible difference between the three groups and that they could be combined.

Empirical analysis based on structural equation modeling

Each variable’s reliability is tested using SPSS 21.0. The variables’ convergent validity, discriminant validity, and reliability were assessed using the SEM method in AMOS 24.0. Table 1 shows the findings.

Table 1. Test results of reliability and validity of variables.

The reliability study revealed that each variable’s Cronbach’s value was larger than the standard of 0.70, indicating that the latent variables were reliable. The CFA of measurement model showed x 2 / df = 1.031, <2.0; RMSE = 0.012, less than 0.05; GFI = 0.924, CFI = 0.998, TLI = 0.997, all exceeding the specified critical value of 0.90, measuring the overall fitness of the model. The model’s values coincide with the sample data. Each measure’s factor loading was above 0.70, indicating high convergent validity. Each variable’s CR exceeds 0.70. Each variable’s AVE was above 0.50, indicating high discriminant validity. The variable measurement model has a good validity structure in general and can be investigated further.

The AMOS 24.0 examines the SEM of the enterprise’s sample data and the structural model’s overall fitting degree using the SEM analysis method to test the conceptual model. From the absolute fitting index, we can see that x 2 /df = 1.074, Less than 3 to achieve significance; RMSEA = 0.008. The model presentation is satisfactory at this stage. All three measures of relative fit (NFI, GFI, and CFI) are higher than the theoretical requirement of 0.90. All the results from the statistical analysis were statistically significant. This supports the validity of the model.

Examining the path coefficient’s significance is a primary way that SEM helps researchers confirm their research hypotheses. Coefficients with positive signs indicate a significant positive relationship between the two variables. The hypothetical relationship does not true if the coefficient is not significant. This hypothetical relationship, as seen in Figure 2 and Table 2 , is briefly discussed below.

Figure 2. The fitting results based on structural equation modeling (SEM).

Table 2. Hypothesis test results.

As depicted in Figure 3 , a model of influencing elements of strategic decision-making ability based on SEM has been constructed by removing the hypothetical path that was rejected following the results of the verification.

Figure 3. Influencing factors model of strategic decision-making capacity based on structural equation modeling (SEM).

From the perspective of the relationship between cognitive factors and decision-making ability, the structural equation model results show that attention has no significant influence on action ability, memory on scanning ability, and thinking on scanning ability, which does not accord with the assumptions of this paper. The reason may be that some of the cognitive factors have not been effectively played because the strategic decision-makers make decisions.

From the relationship between emotional factors and decision-making ability, the structural equation model structure shows that emotion has no significant influence on paraphrasing ability, emotion on action ability, and emotion on scanning ability, which does not accord with the assumptions of this paper. May emotions have a negative impact on strategic decisions, as positive emotions make people optimistic or pessimistic about risk assessment of decision, strategic decision quality has a positive and negative effect, positive effect helps to improve the strategic decision quality, and vice versa. These two effects offset the board of social capital on technology innovation strategic decision quality influence is not significant.

Empirical analysis based on structural equation modeling – artificial neural network

Figure 4 shows a structured neural network model based on SEM results. In a structured neural network, five exogenous latent variables provide 17 inputs, while one endogenous latent variable generate five outputs. The first hidden layer represents an external latent variable, and there are five nodes. The second hidden layer represents the endogenous latent variable, three nodes. The third hidden layer represents the endogenous latent variable, one node.

Figure 4. A structured neural network model structure.

Using MATLAB neural network training model parameters, 788 training samples and 338 testing samples are used. Input, hidden, and output layers pick logistic. Maximum learning iterations (network steps) can be set to 2,000, target accuracy to 0.00, and learning efficiency to 0.1. MSE and R2t are determined using the trained model on test data. The RMSE of each test index is 0.1, and the maximum error is 0.2 ( Figure 5 ). The model converges better after 2,000 iterations. Each measurement index’s R 2 is over 0.5, suggesting acceptable model fitting.

Figure 5. Neural network test results.

Normalized neuronal connection weight reflects each factor’s influence. A neural network study reveals that various factors affect strategic decision-making in distinct ways. For scanning ability, attentiveness is 0.25 and emotion is 0.19. Ideation has the biggest weight (0.27), followed by memory and attention (0.21 and 0.20), and feeling (0.18). For action ability, ideation weighs 0.24, followed by memory, and sentiment. Strategic decision-making ability affect EP in distinct ways, scanning ability is 0.33, interpretation ability is 0.25, and action ability is 0.24 shown in Figure 6 .

Figure 6. Influencing factors model of strategic decision-making capacity based on structural equation modeling – artificial neural network (SEM-ANN).

This paper proposes an SEM-ANN-based method for measuring strategic decision-making ability, and empirical analysis proves its potential effectiveness. A structured neural network model can describe the link and influence between network nodes and increase interpret ability. ANN can illustrate nonlinear relationships between influencing elements in SEM. Neural network nonlinear fitting improves model fit. Attention, memory, ideation, emotion, and sentiment influence strategic decision-making. Five factors affect strategic decision-making. Learning to interact with others is important for personal growth and professional relationships. Entrepreneurs with strong cognitive abilities can build a large, high-quality social circle to promote their business and get the ultimate performance. This study has the following implications and we also provide the limitations and future research directions.

Theoretical implications

This research found that entrepreneurs can benefit from enhancing the following facets of their strategic decision-making abilities. Prioritize attention enhancement because it has a sizeable effect on scanning speed and a sizeable favorable effect on interpretation speed. Entrepreneurs should train themselves to observe things methodically and deliberately, with a focus on noticing minute shifts and variances in the decision-making environment and the psychology of those involved. Second, cognition enhancement should be a priority. The capacity for remembering information greatly aids in understanding and acting. A better decision-maker is one who actively works to develop their memory, studies the art of memory, and places a premium on using the memory method. Third, think about how to better your ideas. Entrepreneurial ability to generate new ideas is the single most important aspect of their intelligence. They should be adept at letting their imaginations run wild, challenging conventional wisdom, and looking at issues from many angles. In the fourth place, try to consciously hold on to a positive feeling. If you want to avoid being swayed by your emotions when deciding, you should make your choice after the excitement has died down. To foster settings conducive to evidence-based decision-making, decision-makers must acquire the skills necessary to consciously nurture and cultivate noble sentiments. The government should allocate funds to improve the quality of required education and training.

Practical implications

The research conclusion of the paper enrich and strengthen the evidence of the positive influencing factors of strategic ability, empirically prove the relationship between strategic decision-making ability and EP, and put forward practical suggestions for improving decision-making ability and EP. However, the following limitations remain, and the data cross-section design makes the study results have some common methodological bias. Although the CFA was passed, the relevant impact is still not completely excluded, and future studies can use a longitudinal design for further verification.

Limitations and future directions

Apart from the implications, our study has a few limitations that could be covered by future researchers. First, this cross-sectional study used data from a single source, which may introduce methodological biases and causal constraints when assessing relationships. Single-source data are unsuitable for robust findings, even if we have tried to mitigate typical procedure bias and found no bias. To validate the model, we recommend collecting data on various time lags in future research. Second, the data is collected only for one country which may neglect the potential effect of cultural aspects. Therefore, it is also recommended that future scholars used cross-cultural data to analyze the EP by considering various cultural factors.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author contributions

JF: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, and writing – original draft preparation. PH: supervision, fund acquisition, and project administration. WZ: software, formal analysis, and data curation. AK: validation and writing – review and editing. All authors equally contributed to revising and finalizing the manuscript.

This work was supported by the Central Government’s support for the Reform and Development of Local Colleges and Universities Fund Talent Training Project.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Abbas, J. (2020). Impact of total quality management on corporate green performance through the mediating role of corporate social responsibility. J. Clean. Prod. 242:118458. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118458

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Agarwala, N., and Chaudhary, R. D. (2021). ‘Made in China 2025’: Poised for Success? India Q. 77, 424–461. doi: 10.1177/09749284211027250

Anugrah, G., and Hermawan, P. (2019). Pre-trip decision on value co-creation of peer-to-peer accommodation services. Acta Inform. Malaysia 3, 19–21. doi: 10.26480/aim.02.2019.19.21

Autier, F., and Picq, T. (2005). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for SHRM research? The case of the video game industry. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 31, 204–221. doi: 10.1504/ijtm.2005.006631

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baoshan, G., Lingjun, T., and Liu, Y. (2009). Theory research on entrepreneurial performance based on organizational performance perspective. Mod. Manag. 02, 33–35.

Google Scholar

Barbot, B. (2018). The dynamics of creative ideation: Introducing a new assessment paradigm. Front. Psychol. 9:2529. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02529

Bechara, A., and Martin, E. M. (2004). Impaired decision making related to working memory deficits in individuals with substance addictions. Neuropsychology 18, 152–162. doi: 10.1037/0894-4105.18.1.152

Bilancini, E., Boncinelli, L., and Mattiassi, A. (2019). Assessing actual strategic behavior to construct a measure of strategic ability. Front. Psychol. 9:2750. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02750

Brosch, T., Scherer, K., Grandjean, D., and Sander, D. (2013). The impact of emotion on perception, attention, memory, and decision-making. Swiss Med. Wkly 143:w13786. doi: 10.4414/smw.2013.13786

Bryant, P. (2007). Self-regulation and decision heuristics in entrepreneurial opportunity evaluation and exploitation. Manag. Decis. 45, 732–748. doi: 10.1108/00251740710746006

Campos-Blázquez, J. R., Morcillo, P., and Rubio-Andrada, L. (2020). Employee innovation using ideation contests: Seven-step process to align strategic challenges with the innovation process. Res. Technol. Manag. 63, 20–28. doi: 10.1080/08956308.2020.1790237

Chen, L. S. (2022). Research on heterogeneous environmental regulation and corporate substantive environmental strategy development. Ecol. Econ. 38, 139–145.

Chou, S. F., Horng, J. S., Sam Liu, C. H., and Lin, J. Y. (2020). Identifying the critical factors of customer behavior: An integration perspective of marketing strategy and components of attitudes. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 55:102113. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102113

Clohessy, T., and Acton, T. (2019). Investigating the influence of organizational factors on blockchain adoption: An innovation theory perspective. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 119, 1457–1491. doi: 10.1108/IMDS-08-2018-0365

Del Missier, F., Visentini, M., and Mäntylä, T. (2015). Option generation in decision making: Ideation beyond memory retrieval. Front. Psychol. 5:1584. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01584

Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Janssen, M., Lal, B., Williams, M. D., and Clement, M. (2017). An empirical validation of a unified model of electronic government adoption (UMEGA). Gov. Inf. Q. 34, 211–230. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2017.03.001

Fechner, H. B., Pachur, T., Schooler, L. J., Mehlhorn, K., Battal, C., Volz, K. G., et al. (2016). Strategies for memory-based decision making: Modeling behavioral and neural signatures within a cognitive architecture. Cognition 157, 77–99. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.08.011

Feng, J., Pan, Y., and Zhuang, W. (2022). Measuring the enterprise green innovation strategy decision-making quality: A moderating—mediating model. Front. Psychol. 13:915624. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.915624

Foo, P. Y., Lee, V. H., Tan, G. W. H., and Ooi, K. B. (2018). A gateway to realising sustainability performance via green supply chain management practices: A PLS–ANN approach. Exp. Syst. Appl. 107, 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2018.04.013

Forbes, D. P. (2007). Reconsidering the strategic implications of decision comprehensiveness. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32, 361–376. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2007.24349585

Friedman, Y., and Carmeli, A. (2018). The influence of decision comprehensiveness on innovative behaviors in small entrepreneurial firms: The power of connectivity. Innov. Manag. Policy Pract. 20, 61–83. doi: 10.1080/14479338.2017.1369141

Gao, S., Qiao, R., Lim, M. K., Li, C., Qu, Y., and Xia, L. (2021). Integrating corporate website information into qualitative assessment for benchmarking green supply chain management practices for the chemical industry. J. Clean. Prod. 311:127590. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127590

Goldstein, A. N., Greer, S. M., Saletin, J. M., Harvey, A. G., Nitschke, J. B., and Walker, M. P. (2013). Tired and apprehensive: Anxiety amplifies the impact of sleep loss on aversive brain anticipation. J. Neurosci. 33, 10607–10615. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5578-12.2013

Griessenberger, H., Hoedlmoser, K., Heib, D. P. J., Lechinger, J., Klimesch, W., and Schabus, M. (2012). Consolidation of temporal order in episodic memories. Biol. Psychol. 91, 150–155. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2012.05.012

Heidari, M., and Ebrahimi, P. (2016). Examining the relationship between critical-thinking skills and decision-making ability of emergency medicine students. Indian J. Crit. Care Med. 20, 581–586. doi: 10.4103/0972-5229.192045

Hongjia, M., Baobao, D., and Baoshan, G. (2010). Empirical research on the relations between network ability and information acquisition and enterprise performance of high-tech enterprises. Sci. Res. 28, 127–132.

Hu, R., Shahzad, F., Abbas, A., and Xu, N. (2022). Empirical analysis of the impact of industrial internet development environment on open green innovation of manufacturing enterprises. Front. Environ. Sci. 10:947675. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.947675

Jiatong, W., Li, C., Murad, M., Shahzad, F., and Ashraf, S. F. (2021a). Impact of social entrepreneurial factors on sustainable enterprise development: Mediating role of social network and moderating effect of government regulations. SAGE Open 11, 1–15. doi: 10.1177/21582440211030636

Jiatong, W., Murad, M., Bajun, F., Tufail, M. S., Mirza, F., and Rafiq, M. (2021b). Impact of entrepreneurial education, mindset, and creativity on entrepreneurial intention: Mediating role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Front. Psychol. 12:724440. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724440

Jugovac, D., and Cavallero, C. (2012). Twenty-four hours of total sleep deprivation selectively impairs attentional networks. Exp. Psychol. 59, 115–123. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000133

Kang, M., and Lee, M. J. (2017). Absorptive capacity, knowledge sharing, and innovative behaviour of R&D employees. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 29, 219–232. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2016.1211265

Kaplan, S. (2011). Research in cognition and strategy: Reflections on two decades of progress and a look to the future. J. Manag. Stud. 48, 665–695. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00983.x

Kauffmann, E., Peral, J., Gil, D., Ferrández, A., Sellers, R., and Mora, H. (2019). Managing marketing decision-making with sentiment analysis: An evaluation of the main product features using text data mining. Sustainability 11:4235. doi: 10.3390/su11154235

Kazmaier, J., and van Vuuren, J. H. (2020). A generic framework for sentiment analysis: Leveraging opinion-bearing data to inform decision making. Decis. Support Syst. 135:113304. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2020.113304

Kumbure, M. M., Tarkiainen, A., Luukka, P., Stoklasa, J., and Jantunen, A. (2020). Relation between managerial cognition and industrial performance: An assessment with strategic cognitive maps using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res. 114, 160–172. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.001

Li, C., Ashraf, S. F., Shahzad, F., Bashir, I., Murad, M., Syed, N., et al. (2020a). Influence of knowledge management practices on entrepreneurial and organizational performance: A mediated-moderation model. Front. Psychol. 11:577106. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.577106

Li, G., Wang, X., and Wu, J. (2019). How scientific researchers form green innovation behavior: An empirical analysis of China’s enterprises. Technol. Soc. 56, 134–146. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.09.012

Li, X., Du, J., and Long, H. (2020b). Understanding the Green Development Behavior and Performance of Industrial Enterprises (GDBP-IE): Scale development and validation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17:1716. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051716

Luber, B., Steffener, J., Tucker, A., Habeck, C., Peterchev, A. V., Deng, Z. D., et al. (2013). Extended remediation of sleep deprived-induced working memory deficits using fMRI-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation. Sleep 36, 857–871. doi: 10.5665/sleep.2712

Milliken, F. J., and Vollrath, D. A. (1991). Strategic decision-making tasks and group effectiveness: Insights from theory and research on small group performance. Hum. Relat. 44, 1229–1253. doi: 10.1177/001872679104401201

Morente-Molinera, J. A., Kou, G., Samuylov, K., Ureña, R., and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2019). Carrying out consensual Group Decision Making processes under social networks using sentiment analysis over comparative expressions. Knowl. Based Syst. 165, 335–345. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.12.006

Nadkarni, S., and Narayanan, V. K. (2007). The evolution of collective strategy frames in high- and low-velocity industries. Organ. Sci. 18, 688–710. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0268

Narayanan, V. K., Zane, L. J., and Kemmerer, B. (2011). The cognitive perspective in strategy: An integrative review. J. Manag. 37, 305–351. doi: 10.1177/0149206310383986

Pan, X., Han, C., Lu, X., Jiao, Z., and Ming, Y. (2020). Green innovation ability evaluation of manufacturing enterprises based on AHP–OVP model. Ann. Oper. Res. 290, 409–419. doi: 10.1007/s10479-018-3094-6

Pasini, A. (2015). Artificial neural networks for small dataset analysis. J. Thorac. Dis. 7, 953–960. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.04.61

Ruigrok, W., Peck, S. I., and Keller, H. (2006). Board characteristics and involvement in strategic decision making: Evidence from Swiss companies. J. Manag. Stud. 43, 1201–1226. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00634.x

Ruobing, R., Chengjun, W., Xiaoming, S., and Yalan, W. (2022). The impact of the multi-dimensional working experience in the career role transformation on the performance of technology entrepreneurs. Sci. Technol. Prog. Countermeas. 39, 130–140.

Sabet, E., Yazdani, N., and De Leeuw, S. (2017). Supply chain integration strategies in fast evolving industries. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 28, 29–46. doi: 10.1108/IJLM-01-2015-0013

Sarker, S., and Palit, M. (2014). Determinants of success factors of women entrepreneurs in bangladesh- a study based on khulna region. Bus. Econ. Res. 4:237. doi: 10.5296/ber.v4i2.6337

Schønning, A., Walther, A., Machold, S., and Huse, M. (2019). The effects of directors’ exploratory, transformative and exploitative learning on boards’ strategic involvement: An absorptive capacity perspective. Eur. Manag. Rev. 16, 683–698. doi: 10.1111/emre.12186

Shahzad, F., Ahmad, Z., Hassan, N. M., and Rafiq, M. (2021). A two-staged SEM-neural network approach for predicting the determinants of mobile government service quality. Int. J. Innov. Creat. Chang. 15, 159–185.

Shahzad, F., Du, J., Khan, I., and Wang, J. (2022). Decoupling institutional pressure on green supply chain management efforts to boost organizational performance: Moderating impact of big data analytics capabilities. Front. Environ. Sci. 10:911392. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.911392

Shahzad, F., Xiu, G. Y., and Shahbaz, M. (2017). Organizational culture and innovation performance in Pakistan’s software industry. Technol. Soc. 51, 66–73. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.08.002

Shahzad, F., Xiu, G., Shafique Khan, M. A., and Shahbaz, M. (2020). Predicting the adoption of a mobile government security response system from the user’s perspective: An application of the artificial neural network approach. Technol. Soc. 62:101278. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101278

Shukla, M., Rasmussen, E. C., and Nestor, P. G. (2019). Emotion and decision-making: Induced mood influences IGT scores and deck selection strategies. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 41, 341–352. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2018.1562049

Spanuth, T., Heidenreich, S., and Wald, A. (2020). Temporary organisations in the creation of dynamic capabilities: Effects of temporariness on innovative capacity and strategic flexibility. Ind. Innov. 27, 1186–1208. doi: 10.1080/13662716.2020.1842723

Stocco, A., Yamasaki, B. L., and Prat, C. S. (2018). Human performance across decision making, selective attention, and working memory tasks: Experimental data and computer simulations. Data Br. 17, 907–914. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.056

Sun, L., Wang, T., and Guan, F. (2021). How the strength of social ties influences users’ information sharing and purchase intentions. Curr. Psychol. ahead-of-p. doi: 10.1007/s12144-021-02102-x

Tan, G. W. H., Ooi, K. B., Leong, L. Y., and Lin, B. (2014). Predicting the drivers of behavioral intention to use mobile learning: A hybrid SEM-Neural Networks approach. Comput. Hum. Behav. 36, 198–213. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.052

Theriou, G., and Chatzoudes, D. (2015). Exploring the entrepreneurship-performance relationship: Evidence from Greek SMEs. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 22, 352–375. doi: 10.1108/JSBED-03-2013-0024

Thomas, G. F., Zolin, R., and Hartman, J. L. (2009). The central role of communication in developing trust and its effect on employee involvement. J. Bus. Commun. 46, 287–310. doi: 10.1177/0021943609333522

Treffers, T., Klarner, P., and Huy, Q. N. (2020). Emotions, time, and strategy: The effects of happiness and sadness on strategic decision-making under time constraints. Long Range Plann. 53:101954. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2019.101954

Tuu, H., and Olsen, O. (2010). Nonlinear effects between satisfaction and loyalty: An empirical study of different conceptual relationships. J. Targeting. Meas. Anal. Mark 18, 239–251.

Wally, S., and Baum, J. R. (1994). Personal and structural determinants of the pace of strategic decision making. Acad. Manag. J. 37, 932–956. doi: 10.5465/256605

Wang, H., Zhang, X., and An, L. (2018). Research on the influence of knowledge base and relationship network on innovation performance. Acta Inform. Malaysia 2, 01–03. doi: 10.26480/aim.02.2018.01.03

Wang, J., Shahzad, F., Khan, I., and Siyal, A. W. (2022). Decision making with an alternative mindset in an online shopping environment: Identifying user intentions toward facebook-commerce. Front. Psychol. 13:848931. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.848931

Wang, L., and Xu, Y. (2019). Research status and prospect of environmental scanning behavior of Enterprise managers. J. Inf. Resour. Manag. 9, 89–100.

Wang, M., and Liu, Z. (2022). How do green innovation strategies contribute to firm performance under supply chain risk? Evidence From China’s manufacturing sector. Front. Psychol. 13:894766. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.894766

Wiseman, N., Moebs, S., Mwale, M., and Zuwarimwe, J. (2022). The role of support organisations in promoting organic farming innovations and sustainability. Malaysian J. Sustain. Agric. 6, 44–50. doi: 10.26480/mjsa.01.2022.35.41

Xi, W., Xinghui, L., Taoyong, S., and Zhiwen, S. (2019). The influence of humble leadership on entrepreneurial performance —— is based on strategic decision making. East China Econ. Manag. 33, 29–35.

Xie, Q., Liu, L., Malik, H., Chupradit, S., and Chupradit, P. W. (2021). The influence of entrepreneurial characteristics on the performance of tourism vlogger entrepreneurs. Front. Psychol 12:725545. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.725545

Xu, N., Fan, X., and Hu, R. (2022). Adoption of green industrial internet of things to improve organizational performance: The role of institutional isomorphism and green innovation practices. Front. Psychol. 13:917533. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.917533

Yang, Y., Xu, D. L., Yang, J. B., and Chen, Y. W. (2018). An evidential reasoning-based decision support system for handling customer complaints in mobile telecommunications. Knowl. Based Syst. 162, 202–210. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.09.029

Yenkimaleki, M., and van Heuven, V. J. (2017). The effect of memory training on consecutive interpreting performance by interpreter trainees. Forum 15, 157–172. doi: 10.1075/forum.15.1.09yen

Yuetong, H. (2022). Research on the influence of strategic flexibility and selection ability on enterprise innovation ability. Sci. Technol. Prog. Countermeas. 29, 91–95.

Zhang, D., Xu, W., Zhu, Y., and Zhang, X. (2015). “Can sentiment analysis help mimic decision-making process of loan granting? A novel credit risk evaluation approach using GMKL model,” in Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , (Kauai, HI: IEEE), 949–958. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2015.118

Zhou, F., and Wu, Y. J. (2018). How humble leadership fosters employee innovation behavior. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 39, 375–387. doi: 10.1108/LODJ-07-2017-0181

Zhou, Y., Wang, C., Shahzad, F., and Murad, M. (2021). The influence mechanism of knowledge-based professionals’ core value identity on creativity from the perspective of the knowledge economy. Front. Psychol. 12:724463. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724463

Keywords : strategic decision-making, entrepreneurship, performance, cognitive, SEM

Citation: Feng J, Han P, Zheng W and Kamran A (2022) Identifying the factors affecting strategic decision-making ability to boost the entrepreneurial performance: A hybrid structural equation modeling – artificial neural network approach. Front. Psychol. 13:1038604. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1038604

Received: 07 September 2022; Accepted: 12 October 2022; Published: 31 October 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Feng, Han, Zheng and Kamran. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Jiaying Feng, [email protected] ; Ping Han, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.