Author(s)

Atsuo Murata^*, Tomoko Nakamura

Department of Intelligent Mechanical Systems, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan.

The evidence of outcome bias was explored in a two-player (Player 1: allocator and Player 2: evaluator) economic game experiment where the reward allocation was made between two players. The experimental factors were the intention of an allocator (Player 1), the type of chosen dice (selfish, fair, and generous), and the outcome (selfish, fair, and generous). The outcome bias occurred when the type of dice chosen by the allocator (Player 1) was not only a selfish one but also a generous one. The comparison between the two conditions (intentional and no-intentional conditions) definitely showed that Player 2 punished Player 1 to a larger extent when the outcome was disadvantageous for Player 2 (selfish outcome) and Player 2 rewarded Player 1 when the outcome was advantageous (generous outcome) irrespective of whether the die was chosen out of the three types intentionally or not. Moreover, the outcome bias was not observed when the outcome was fair. Thus, we could verify the hypothesis that we are readily got trapped in the outcome bias. Some implications were given for safety management that put more emphasis on the process than on the outcome.

Decision Making, Outcome, Process, Intention, Outcome Bias, Cognitive Bias, Safety Management

Murata, A. and Nakamura, T. (2015) Effect of Intention on Outcome Bias in Decision Making—Implications for Safety Management. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 5, 561-569. doi: 10.4236/jbbs.2015.513053.