Survey reveals overconfidence and herding biases enhance information evaluation, while decision avoidance reduces it in Singaporean workplaces.
Purpose: This study empirically investigates the direct relationships between three prominent cognitive biases (i.e. overconfidence bias [OB], herding bias [HB] and decision avoidance bias [AB]) and two crucial stages of workplace decision-making (i.e. evaluating information [EI] and searching information [SI]). Design/methodology/approach: A mono-quantitative, cross-sectional survey was conducted amongst 365 employees in Singapore. Statistical techniques such as paired sample t-tests, correlation analysis and multiple regression were employed.Findings: Results indicated that OB significantly and positively correlates with EI (r = 0.582, p < 0.001) and SI (r = 0.537, p < 0.001). Similarly, HB exhibits a significant positive relationship with EI (r = 0.340, p < 0.001) and SI (r = 0.418, p < 0.001). By contrast, AB demonstrates a significant negative relationship with EI (r = −0.209, p < 0.001) and SI (r = −0.171, p < 0.001).Originality: This work extends research on decision-making biases beyond financial and investment contexts by examining their role in workplace settings. It contributes to behavioural economics and organisational studies by offering empirical evidence from Singapore, a context underrepresented in existing literature.Research limitations/implications: This study focused on only three biases within a cross-sectional quantitative design, which may be affected by survey errors and outliers. Future research should test additional biases, stages and moderating factors across industries, regions and disciplines to build a more comprehensive understanding of workplace decision-making.Practical implications: The research contributes to a better understanding of organisational decision-making practices for employees in the workplace when heuristics and biases are present. It raises awareness among organisations and provides a foundation for future research to strengthen decision-making practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benjamin Ohms (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: