-pre recorded lectures and readings
-Practice & Q&A session
Literature Lecture slides are mandatory, as well as the following readings:
Module 1: Heuristics & Biases
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science,
185(4157), 1124-1131.
• Dhar, R., & Gorlin, M. (2013). A dual-system framework to understand preference construction
processes in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(4), 528-542.
Module 2: Decisions Under Risk
• Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1984) Choices, Values, and Frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-
350.
• Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
American Psychologist, 58(9), 697.
Module 3: Principles of Persuasion
• Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Harnessing the science of persuasion. Harvard Business Review, 79(9), 72-81.
• Cialdini, R., & Cliffe, S. (2013). The uses (and abuses) of influence. Harvard Business Review, 91(7-8),
76-81. 3
Module 4: Choice Architecture
• Ly, K., Mazar, N., Zhao, M., & Soman, D. (2013). A practitioner's guide to nudging. Rotman School of
Management Working Paper, (2609347).
• Behavioural Insights Team (2014). EAST. Four Simple Ways to Apply Behavioural Insights.
Module 5: Leader Influence
• Yukl, G., Seifert, C.F., & Chavez, C. (2008). Validation of the extended influence behavior
questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 609-621.
• Antonakis, J., Fenley, M., & Liechti, S. (2012). Learning charisma. Harvard Business Review, 90(6),
127–130.
Module 6: Team Processes
• Hackman, J. R. (2009). Why teams don't work. Interview by Diane Coutu. Harvard Business Review,
87(5), 98- 105.
• Listen to this podcast episode before the practice session: WorkLife by Adam Grant, Season 1, The
Daily Show's secret to creativity: o
https://www.ted.com/talks/worklife_with_adam_grant_the_daily_show_s_secret_to_creativity?
referrer=playlist-worklife_with_adam_grant
Module 7: Hierarchy, Power and Status
,• Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and
status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351-398.
Module 8: Organizational Systems of Influence
• Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Hermida, R. (2010). A review and synthesis of situational strength in the
organizational sciences. Journal of Management, 36(1), 121-140.
• Listen to this podcast episode before the practice session: This American Life, 561, NUMMI (2015) o
https://www.thisamericanlife.org/561/nummi-2015
Assessment and examinations
You will be assessed on the basis of an individual written test (70%) and two group assignments (15%
each). To pass the course, you have to achieve a minimum grade of 4.5 on the written test, and a
minimum overall grade of 5.5.
Written test (70%). The exam will take place on campus. It will involve a mix of multiple choice
questions and open questions.
Group Assignment 1 (15%). You will propose a campaign that builds on the theories we study in class
and aims at aligning people’s behaviour with the goals of sustainable development. You will design
an experiment aimed at testing the effectiveness of such campaign. You will present your work in a
video.
Group Assignment 2 (15%). We will provide you with a short description of a real organizational case
in collaboration with a firm. Based on the problem described in the case and the provided theories in
class, you will develop an intervention to address the problem. We ask you to design an experiment
aimed at testing the effectiveness of your intervention and describe the experiment in a short paper.
Gabriele’s intro
Warm-up survey > compulsory readings & recordings with narrated slides > live session
Presence is non-mandatory, lectures not recorded,
Exam: 20 MC questions + 2 open questions based on videos, readings, live sessions
,Module 1 heuristics and biases
Videos
A “rational” decision
How Econs* decide…. How about humans?
1. Define the problem
Why are we making this choices
2. Identify all decision criteria
What we value In this problem, criteria we should base criteria on
3. Allocate weights to the criteria
How important is the criteria
4. Identify all alternatives
What are the solutions to the problem, options you have
5. Evaluate the alternatives
How scores these options on decision criteria
6. Choose the best alternative
Which option gives highest value
Bounded Rationality
Resources (time, cognitive, etc.) are limited (vb tafel kopen ga je niet naar alle winkels in het land om
elke tafel te bekijken en dan te kiezen maar naar 1 winkel en daaruit kiezen)
We often don’t optimize, but “satisfice” (e.g., consider only few alternatives)
“Predictable” irrationality
We are not just often “wrong”, We are systematically wrong
That means we can study how we decide
System 1 and system 2
System 1 System 2
Automatic Controlled
Fast Slow
Not cognitively demanding Cognitively demanding
“Intuitive” answer “rational” answer
Heuristics (mental shortcuts to satisfactory solutions)
Efficient because no resources required, and work most of the
time
Biases (systematic deviations from “rationality”) predictable!
2 notes: what’s rational is a debated question & not all ‘biases’ are due to heuristics/system 1
Probability estimation
Eg buying a house, probably that you like it their and it’s a good investment.
Eg going on vacation, weather is gonna be good, you like it their,
How do we make these kind of judgments? What are some of the heuristics we use?
Representativeness heuristics
“The more X resembles Y, the more likely X is to be Y” eg a bird is a duck (looks like, sounds like,
walks like a duck than it’s a duck)
1. How confident are you in this resemble
Stereotypes are a heuristic, there’re accurate but misleading. But accurate
stereotypes are still stereotypes.
Information is often not enough
2. How likely is Y in the first place?
, Representativeness ignores base rates
o Conjunction fallacy
o False positives
Conjunction fallacy: people fail to understand that by definition the base rate is different and
therefore it must be more likely that Linda is a bank teller than being a bankteller + active feminist
False positives:
Availability heuristic:
What makes examples easier to recall: 1. familiarity
e.g. simple study, participant listen to a list of names (50% men’s names, 50% women’s names). One
group had famous men’s names and the other group famous women’s names. “Where there more
men’s names or women’s names in the list?”
2. Recency
e.g. scare for terrorist attacks around “00 because a lot attacks happened.
3. Salience
the quality of being particularly noticeable or important; prominence. E.g. chance to die from
airplane crash in comparison to shark attack or car crash.
