Leadership Style, Decision Context, and the Poliheuristic Theory of Decision Making: An Experimental Analysis

Abstract

The poliheuristic (PH) theory of decision making has made important contributions to our understanding of political decision making but remains silent about certain key aspects of the decision process. Specifically, PH theory contends that leaders screen out politically unacceptable options, but it provides no guidance on (1) the crucial threshold at which leaders reject options as politically unacceptable, (2) whether this threshold varies across leaders and situations, and, (3) if so, which factors shape variation in this threshold. We integrate PH theory with research on political leadership and decision context and derive hypotheses from this modified PH framework. An experimental test reveals that situational context and leadership style affect both (1) the ``noncompensatory threshold'' at which decision makers reject options as politically unacceptable and (2) how much decision makers rely on their constituents' views in making policy choices. We conclude that a modified PH theory incorporating these insights will have enhanced explanatory and predictive power.

Culture Matters: Individualism vs. Collectivism in Conflict Decision-Making

“…In the second stage, the remaining alternatives are then evaluated in a rational way in order to minimize risk and maximize benefit [28][29][30]. Poliheuristic theory has made important contributions to understanding the decision making process in the realm of foreign policy [31], but its application to other types of decisions made by individuals and groups has been limited [29].…”

Delineating the Scope Conditions of the Poliheuristic Theory of Foreign Policy Decision Making: The Noncompensatory Principle and the Domestic Salience of Foreign Policy

“…It is important to note, however, that a broader understanding of poliheuristic theory would relax the assumption that domestic politics is the only conceivable noncompensatory dimension in foreign policy decision making (see Goertz :15; Keller and Yang :706–707; Brummer ). According to this view, the initial stage of the two‐stage model can also involve the noncompensatory screening of alternatives on other dimensions, including economic, military, or bureaucratic politics concerns.…”

“…It is precisely this specification of the noncompensatory principle, however, that has come in for criticism. In particular, poliheuristic theory has been challenged to elaborate on when decision makers are likely to find foreign policy alternatives unacceptable for their domestic political implications and to spell out the conditions under which the noncompensatory status of domestic audience costs will prove more or less restrictive (Dacey and Carlson :53–54; Keller and Yang :688–689). In particular, the added value of poliheuristic theory in no small part relies on the noncompensatory principle to cut down the number of decision alternatives which analysts have to investigate on the second stage of the model to a manageable level (see James and Zhang :46–47; Ye :320–321).…”

Empathy and Strategic Interaction in Crises: A Poliheuristic Perspective

“…Although many applications of PH theory have assumed that domestic political feasibility is the all‐important screening dimension in stage one, this need not always be the case (e.g., Mintz 1993). The identity of the screening dimension(s) may vary considerably across leaders and situations (Keller and Yang 2008). Therefore, the dyadic non compensatory model treats leaders’ screening criteria not as a theoretical given or a product of domestic structure but as a crucial independent variable that will shape the outcomes of dyadic interactions.…”