scholarly journals Développement et validation d'un questionnaire de la prise de décision dans le champ d'assurance

2021 ◽  
Vol 88 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 91-114
Author(s):  
Boubacar Coulibaly ◽  
Farzaneh Pahlavan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Measurement Instrument ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Exploratory Analysis ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Prise De Décision ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences

The Insurance Decision-Making Questionnaire (IDMQ) was designed to validate a measurement instrument that assesses insurance decision-making on the basis of scenarios and scales and that takes cross-cultural differences into account. First, we analysed the responses of 42 French (N = 22) and Senegalese (N = 19) partic- ipants who responded via the Internet to the 75 items (Pretest). After having carried out an exploratory analysis on 101 French (N = 54) and Senegalese (N = 48) participants and a test-retest on 33 French (N = 17) and Senegalese (N = 16) participants, the results show a satisfactory internal and temporal validity, and are close to those obtained by Jafarkarimi, et al. (2017). We now have a measurement instrument in French that presents different real-life scenarios, with acceptable psychometric qualities, which can be used to evaluate decision-making in the field of insurance.

Effects of Differences in National Culture on Auditors' Judgments and Decisions: A Literature Review of Cross-Cultural Auditing Studies from a Judgment and Decision Making Perspective

2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Nolder ◽  
Tracey J. Riley
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Probability Judgments ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Multicultural Environment ◽  
Audit Firms ◽  
Auditor Judgments

SUMMARY: Motivated by the growing cultural diversity of new hires in audit firms, this paper reviews the literature on cross-cultural differences in auditors' judgment and decision making (JDM). The overarching aim of the review is to summarize the current state of knowledge and compare our understanding of cross-cultural auditors' JDM with the broader cross-cultural JDM research in psychology to stimulate applied research. We develop a framework that categorizes those auditor judgments and decisions most likely affected by cross-cultural differences. The categories include auditors' confidence, risk and probability judgments, risk decisions, conflict decisions, and ethical judgments. We contribute to the cross-cultural audit research in four ways. First, we provide a framework by which future research can be synthesized within auditing and compared with psychology. Second, we recommend specific research questions to respond to both the gaps in extant literature and the changing multicultural environment of audit firms. Third, we advocate for an alternative theoretical approach beyond the examination of cultural traits. Finally, we argue that bicultural auditors represent an unexplored boundary condition on prior findings that warrants more immediate attention from audit researchers.

PRIORITIES DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: PERSPECTIVES, DECISION-MAKING, AND EMPATHY

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afton Nelson ◽  
Kristijan Civljak ◽  
Heather Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Response Distribution ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Subjective Reports

The rapid and ongoing evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in reactionary decision-making and emphasized discord arising from uncertainty. Given that countries have dealt with the pandemic quite differently thus far, it was relevant to explore the undertones of decision-making, as well as the perspectives of the individuals who are affected. The study aimed to investigate the role of confidence and decision-making in pandemic behaviors as well as related pandemic perspectives. The present article discusses findings concerning pandemic-specific decision-making, the influence of empathy on decision-making, and qualitative reports from respondents. The analyzed sample included 561 respondents divided into three cultural groups based on response distribution, geography, and general cultural categorizations (e.g., Western vs. non-Western). The findings revealed insights into the decision-making of pandemic consequences, as well as a lack of cross-cultural differences within the sample. Subjective reports highlighted key themes including trust in science, prevention and preparedness, and suggested next steps from the respondents’ perspectives. These findings from across the globe call for further investigation into cross-cultural decision-making in the pandemic.

scholarly journals Neurocognitive underpinnings of cross-cultural differences in risky decision making

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 671-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xing-Jie Chen ◽  
Lan Ba ◽  
Youngbin Kwak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Emotional Arousal ◽  
Cultural Influence ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Mental Processes ◽  
Attentional Allocation ◽  
Economic Decision ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Economic Decision Making

Abstract Culture permeates across human mind and behavior. Cultural influence is reported even in economic decision making, which involves basic cognitive process, once believed to be invariant across all humans. The current study investigated the neurocognitive processes underlying economic decision making in East Asians and European Americans, with an aim to understand the cross-cultural differences in the discrete mental processes of decision making. Participants performed a risky gambling task that captures the gain maximizing and loss minimizing strategies, while electroencephalography was simultaneously collected. Event-related potentials (ERPs) associated with spontaneous emotional arousal (P2) and effortful attentional allocation (P3) were examined to determine the cultural effects on mental processes during pre-decisional and post-decisional stages. Behaviorally, Americans showed greater loss minimization than Asians. ERPs demonstrated significant cultural differences during post-decisional evaluation of outcomes, but not during pre-decisional processes. In Asians’, ERP associated with emotional arousal (P2) was strongly modulated by gains, while in Americans’, ERP associated with attentional allocation (P3) was strongly modulated by losses. These results suggest that Americans make conscious efforts to be self-reliant when facing financial losses, whereas Asians are more emotionally aroused by financial gains, which invites a refinement to the current theoretical propositions about cultural influence on decision making.

CROSS-CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN DECISION-MAKING STYLES: A STUDY OF COLLEGE STUDENTS IN FIVE COUNTRIES

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung-Soo Yi ◽  
Soonae Park
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
College Students ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Major Goal ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Decision Making Styles ◽  
Limited Support

The major goal of this study was to explore cultural differences in decision-making styles of college students from 5 countries: Korea, Japan, China, the United States, and Canada. On the basis of previous scholarly findings, a questionnaire was developed and distributed to 837 college students in the 5 countries. Of these, 815 were included in the statistical analysis. 2 hypotheses were established that examine 5 decision-making styles: cooperative, collaborative, avoidant, competitive, and dominant. The results provide only limited support for the hypotheses. Further, some results ran counter to the expectations of cultural variability. The findings of the study imply that culture may not be a stagnant phenomenon, and more variables should be explored to accurately evaluate cultural differences in decision-making styles.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document