Decision Outcome Inventory (DOI)
Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 938-956. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.938
|
|
Parker, A. M., Bruine De Bruin, W., & Fischhoff, B. (2015). Negative decision outcomes are more common among people with lower decision-making competence: An item-level analysis of the Decision Outcome Inventory (DOI). Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 363 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00363.
|
The measure:
Bruine de Bruin, Parker, & Fischhoff (2007) DOI.pdf
The DOI is also available
online. For help with scoring, please contact Wändi Bruine de Bruin <wandi(at)cmu.edu>.
Note: See also Bruine de Bruin et al.'s (2007)
Adult Decision Making Competence (ADMC) . See also Parker & FIschhoff's (2005)
Youth Decision Making Competence (YDMC).
Description:
Purpose
|
|
The DOI was designed to assess whether individuals reach satisfactory outcomes, specifically whether they avoid negative decision outcomes. It was developed with the Adult Decision Making Competence (ADMC) (Bruine de Bruin et al., 2007), which assesses how well individuals make decisions.
|
Questions
|
|
34 items / item pairs / item groups using yes/no format.
- For each item pair or group, the first item asks if participants made a certain decision. The subsequent items ask if participants experienced a certain outcome from that decision.
- For the final 6 items, all participants engage in relevant behavior so only the follow-up question is asked -- if participants experienced a certain outcome from that decision.
|
Sub-scales
|
|
N/A
|
Domain
|
|
|
Psychometrics
|
|
|
Sample items
|
|
- In the last 10 years, have you ever
- Rented a movie.
- Returned a movie you rented without having watched it at all.
|
History of Use:
Scale Development & Validation:
|
|
|
Scale Validation. Correlations of the overall DOI with other measures.
- with Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices (Raven, Raven, & Court, 2003): r = .13, p < .05
- with the Reading Comprehension sub-test of the Nelson-Denny Reading Test (Brown, Fishco, & Hanna, 1993): r = .15, p < .01
- with Regret Scale (Schwartz et al., 2002): r = -.13, p < .05
- with Maximization Scale (Schwartz et al., 2002): r = -.26, p < .001
- with Behavioral coping component of the Constructive Thinking Inventory (CTI; Epstein & Meier, 1989): r = .35, p < .001
- with the General Decision Making Style (GDMS; Scott & Bruce, 1995):
- Rational Style: r = .21, p < .001
- Intuitive Style: r = .16, p < .001
- Dependent Style: n.s. (r = .01, p > .05)
- Avoidant Style: r = -.29, p < .001
- Spontaneous Style: r = -.33, p < .001
- with the Adult Decision Making Competence (ADMC; Bruine de Bruin, Parker, & Fischhoff, 2007): r = .29, p < .001
- The authors also report the correlations between the DOI and the 7 components of the ADMC.
|
|
Bruine de Bruin et al. (2007)
|
References:
Scale:
Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 938-956. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.938
|
|
Parker, A. M., Bruine De Bruin, W., & Fischhoff, B. (2015). Negative decision outcomes are more common among people with lower decision-making competence: An item-level analysis of the Decision Outcome Inventory (DOI). Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 363 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00363.
|
Uses:
- Parker, A. M., Bruine de Bruin, W., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Maximizers versus satisficers: Decision-making styles, competence, and outcomes. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(6), 342-350. (Also uses Adult - Decision Making Competence, Constructive Thinking Inventory, General Decision Making Style, and Maximization Scale.)
|
*