Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Conflict Resolution
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mintz, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

How Do Leaders Make Decisions?

A Poliheuristic Perspective

Alex Mintz

Department of Political Science, Texas A&M University, United Nations Studies, Yale University

Poliheuristic theory (PH) bridges the gap between cognitive and rational theories of decision making. PH postulates a two-stage decision process. During the first stage, the set of possible options is reduced by applying a "noncompensatory principle" to eliminate any alternative with an unacceptable return on a critical, typically political, decision dimension. Once the choice set has been reduced to alternatives that are acceptable to the decision maker, the process moves to a second stage, during which the decision maker uses more analytic processing in an attempt to minimize risks and maximize benefits. In this article, the author applies poliheuristic theory to individual, sequential, and interactive decision settings. Subsequent articles in this issue offer theoretical extensions and multiple tests of the theory using multiple methods (formal, statistical, experimental).

Key Words: Decision analysis • poliheuristic theory • multimethod approach

Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 48, No. 1, 3-13 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002703261056
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
J. W. Keller and Y. E. Yang
Leadership Style, Decision Context, and the Poliheuristic Theory of Decision Making: An Experimental Analysis
Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2008; 52(5): 687 - 712.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 European Journal of International RelationsHome page
T. Ohlson
Understanding Causes of War and Peace
European Journal of International Relations, March 1, 2008; 14(1): 133 - 160.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
A. Mintz, S. B. Redd, and A. Vedlitz
Can We Generalize from Student Experiments to the Real World in Political Science, Military Affairs, and International Relations?
Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2006; 50(5): 757 - 776.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cooperation and ConflictHome page
T. Forsberg and C. Pursiainen
Crisis Decision-Making in Finland: Cognition, Institutions and Rationality
Cooperation and Conflict, September 1, 2006; 41(3): 235 - 260.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
A. Mintz
Foreign Policy Decision Making in Familiar and Unfamiliar Settings: An Experimental Study of High-Ranking Military Officers
Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2004; 48(1): 91 - 104.
[Abstract] [PDF]