Training fast and frugal heuristics in military decision making

Abstract

Fast and frugal heuristics have been used to model decision making in applied domains very effectively, suggesting that they could be used to improve applied decision making. We developed a fast and frugal heuristic for infantry decisions using experts from the British Army. This was able to predict around 80% of their decisions using three cues. Next, we examined the benefits of learning to use the fast and frugal heuristic by training junior officers in the British Army to apply the heuristic and assessing their accuracy and mental workload when making decisions. Their performance was compared to a control condition of junior officers who applied standard military decision methods. Participants using the fast and frugal heuristic made decisions as accurately as participants in the control condition, but with reduced mental demand. This demonstrates that fast and frugal heuristics can be learnt and are as effective as analytic decision methods. K E Y W O R D S decision making, fast and frugal heuristics, mental workload

Threat assessment, sense making, and critical decision-making in police, military, ambulance, and fire services

“…Both military and police studies referenced 'perceiving', 'threat assessment', 'high stress decision making' (Akinci and Sadler-Smith 2020;Bonner 2018;Gamble et al 2018;Harris et al 2017;Jederberg et al 2002). Consideration of 'Naturalist Decision Making', and 'Heuristics/Biases' approach (Launder and Perry 2014;Wilson et al 2011;Akinci and Sadler-Smith 2020), 'experience', 'bias' and 'accountability' was present across all services Perona et al 2019;Launder and Perry 2014;Marusich et al 2016;van den Heuvel et al 2014;Gunnarsson and Warrén Stomberg 2009;Bakken and Gilljam 2003;Banks et al 2020;Nja and Rake 2009;Verhage et al 2018;Vickers and Lewinksi 2012). The theory of Recognition Primed Decision making was also cited repeatedly through the texts and across service streams Klein et al 2010;Bonner 2018;Hine et al 2019).…”

“…Despite the reported limitations, a key finding from the literature is that the majority of initial decisions made in rapidly changing, high-risk and uncertain situations by personnel across the sectors are naturalistic in nature (Cohen-Hatton and Honey 2015; Klein et al 2010;Launder and Perry 2014;Bakken and Gilljam 2003;Banks et al 2020;Harman et al 2019;Murdoch 2019;Okoli et al 2016).…”

“…These formal decision strategies share common elements including extended situational analysis (for example, risk identification, assessment and evaluation) and the identification and comparison of multiple options or courses of action. Prior to the development of naturalistic decision theory these formal strategies were used extensively to describe and teach decision processes across firefighting, policing, paramedic and most prominently, military settings (Klein et al 2010;Banks et al 2020;Shortland et al 2018Shortland et al , 2020a.…”

Forecasting and Decision-Making System for Military Resource Allotment

“…Military operation includes planning military armed forces and forecasting demand for required resources. This is one of the vital steps to help effective decisionmaking in saving the lives of the militants [1]. Health and food supplies are the most critical requirements to keep them safe and strong during adverse conditions.…”

Exploring the relationship between response time, studying STEM and substitution bias

“…These theories taxonomise human thought processes into System 1 and System 2 (Kahneman, 2011). System 1 is automatic, without conscious control, uses minimal cognitive resources such as working memory and attention, and often relies on heuristics, resulting in varying degrees of accuracy (Banks, Gamblin, & Hutchinson, 2020). With substitution bias, it is System 1 thinking that replaces aspects of the problem with simpler, more easily solved aspects (Andersson et al, 2020).…”