Compensatory Style Questionnaire (CSQ)

Zakay, D. (1990). The role of personal tendencies in the selection of decision-making strategies. The Psychological Record, 40 (2), 207-213.
The measure and scoring instructions: Zakay (1990) Compensatory Style.doc


Table of Contents


Description


History of Use


References


Description:

Purpose

The CSQ was designed to assess how individuals approach decision situations. It distinguishes between 2 decision styles:
  • A compensatory style chooses the alternative with the highest overall utility weighting.
  • A noncompensatory style chooses the alternative with the highest rating on the single most important attribute.
Questions

40 items using 5-point ratings (1 to 5)
Sub-scales

N/A
Domain


Psychometrics


Sample items

  • It is essential to compare rival alternatives across all their attributes.
  • A good decision maker is able to reach a decision on the basis of one or two important attributes only. (reverse scored)

History of Use:

Scale Uses:


Correlations between compensatory style and:
  • Perceived difficulty of choosing a major: r(120) = .15, p > .01
  • Number of alternatives majors considered: r(120) = .08, p > .01
  • Number of dimensions considered: r(120) = .33, p < .01
  • Subjective decision complexity: r(120) = .27, p < .01
  • Need for Closure (NFCS; Webster & Kruglanski, 1994) (Hebrew translation): r(120) = .12, p > .01
    • Preference for order: r(120) = .20, p < .05
    • Preference for predictability: r(120) = .17, p = .06
    • Decisiveness: r(120) = .01, p > .05
    • Discomfort with ambiguity: r(120) = .19, p < .05
    • Closed-mindedness: r(120) = -.42, p < .01

Shiloh et al. (2001)

References:

Scale:
Zakay, D. (1990). The role of personal tendencies in the selection of decision-making strategies. The Psychological Record, 40 (2), 207-213
Uses:
  • Shiloh, S., Koren, S., & Zakay, D. (2001). Individual differences in compensatory decision-making style and need for closure as correlates of subjective decision complexity and difficulty. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 699-710. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00073-8

*