Promoting the growing field of dynamic decision making

Arló-Costa Dutt, Helzner, Gonzalez, Huber, Wider, Huber, Gonzalez, Lerch, Lebiere, Danner
1984 Busemeyer & Johnson   unpublished
A new journal is starting with this page, and we-the editors-hope that this launch will be a successful one! Before we start with the normal course of the editorial business, let us explain why we made the decision to start a new journal. Most decisions in our everyday lives are part of dynamic decision making processes. They usually are not isolated acts but take place in a context, with a history of events leading up to the decision and a future unfolding after the decision has been taken
more » ... ing our options for later decisions. Additionally our preferences about what we consider a desirable outcome may also change over time. It is this emphasis on agency-the effect our decisions have on a situation and dynamics-the unfolding of a situation over time-that are the hallmarks of dynamic decision making. Examples of dynamic decision making can be found virtually everywhere, be it scheduling a workday, managing a company, establishing a medical diagnosis, or complex political negotiations. We therefore note with pleasure that dynamic decision making (DDM) has recently become a quickly growing field of research in the behavioral sciences. While simple single-shot decision making has long been the staple of decision research and DDM was the exotic exception , we agree with other decision researchers that it may be time to reverse this view (cf. Hertwig & Erev, 2009). Even our understanding of biases and fallacies in simple single-shot decision making may improve when considered from the more comprehensive DDM perspective. Since the beginning of systematic empirical research on DDM about fourty years ago (e.g., Dörner, 1975), it has evolved in many different niches of psychology and other disciplines, with fruitful contributions in areas such as experimental research (
fatcat:o6geocuk5rc5ff6bgxv44fiyou