Evolution of information and decision-making theory using heuristics and biases to analyze pilots’ decision not to vaccinate against COVID-19
Abstract
Using airline 25 pilots due to their uniformity in education, political views, personality traits, and dimensions, an informed grounded theory (GT) studied how the subjects in an information overload environment selected sources and consumed information to create mental models on COVID-19 and make a protective action decision to vaccinate or not. A semi-structured interview guide was used for the Zoom interviews. The developed substantive theory revealed that people’s response to an informational overload environment is to limit the amount and type of information vying for their attention. Individuals prefer to accept like-minded information, so most people will limit sources to a similar type of information in what is termed narrowcasting. An individual’s mental model of a novel threat or hazard will be formed and anchored by this information flow and previous personal experience. The formed mental model is influenced by the bias and veracity of their information sources. The attention of competing information sources is either accepted or rejected based on the congruence of the new information source with the established mental model and the person’s trust in the source of information. More exposure to extreme information and the lack of moderating sources will push and harden the anchor point of a person’s mental model to a more extreme position. Most people lack the expertise to identify and process factual information from misinformation to make appropriate risk analysis and protective action decisions. The least skilled in this area tend to be the most confident in their information validation and newly formed mental models. Individuals use impressions and feelings of the information (System 1) to form these mental models instead of analyzing a series of facts (System 2). People make logical action decisions and judgments based on their mental model no matter how extreme or moderate the position is. Appendices contain a comprehensive alphabetical listing of common heuristics and biases and misinformation definitions.
Collections
- OSU Dissertations [11222]