Microfoundations of Problem Solving: Attentional Engagement Predicts Problem-Solving Strategies

References

• Abbott A (1995) Sequence analysis: New methods for old ideas. Annual Rev. Sociol. 21(1):93–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahorsu DK, Lin CY, Imani V, Saffari M, Griffiths MD, Pakpour AH (2022) The fear of COVID-19 scale: Development and initial validation. Internat. J. Mental Health Addiction 20(3):1537–1545.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrieta JP, Shrestha YR (2022) On the strategic value of equifinal choice. J. Organ. Design. 11:37–45.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atance CM, O’Neill DK (2001) Episodic future thinking. Trends Cognitive Sci. 5(12):533–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baer M, Dirks KT, Nickerson JA (2013) Microfoundations of strategic problem formulation. Strategic Management J. 34(2):197–214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baguley T (2004) Understanding statistical power in the context of applied research. Appl. Ergonomics 35(2):73–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bakeman R (2023) KappaAcc: A program for assessing the adequacy of kappa. Behav. Res. Methods 55(2):633–638.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bakeman R, McArthur D, Quera V, Robinson BF (1997) Detecting sequential patterns and determining their reliability with fallible observers. Psych. Methods 2(4):357–370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baker HE, Paulson SK (1995) Experiential Exercises in Organization Theory (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Balconi M, Brusoni S, Orsenigo L (2010) In defence of the linear model: An essay. Res. Policy 39(1):1–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bales RF, Strodtbeck FL (1951) Phases in group problem-solving. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 46(4):485–495.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bansal P, Kim A, Wood MO (2018) Hidden in plain sight: The importance of scale in organizations’ attention to issues. Acad. Management Rev. 43(2):217–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ, Tushman M (2002) Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47(4):676–707.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camuffo A, Cordova A, Gambardella A, Spina C (2020) A scientific approach to entrepreneurial decision making: Evidence from a randomized control trial. Management Sci. 66(2):564–586.Link, Google Scholar
• Carleton RN, Norton MPJ, Asmundson GJ (2007) Fearing the unknown: A short version of the intolerance of uncertainty scale. J. Anxiety Disorders 21(1):105–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carver CS, Scheier MF (1982) Control theory: A useful conceptual framework for personality–social, clinical, and health psychology. Psych. Bull. 92(1):111–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carver CS, Scheier MF (1990) Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A control-process view. Psych. Rev. 97(1):19–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chaiken S, Trope Y, eds. (1999) Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Ed. Psych. Measurement 20(1):37–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1969) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Cramer H (1946) Mathematical Methods of Statistics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Davis MJ (2010) Contrast coding in multiple regression analysis: Strengths, weaknesses, and utility of popular coding structures. J. Data Sci. 8(1):61–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dewey J (1910) How We Think (DC Heath, Boston, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drucker PF (1959) Long-range planning—Challenge to management science. Management Sci. 5(3):238–249.Link, Google Scholar
• Duncan LA, Schaller M, Park JH (2009) Perceived vulnerability to disease: Development and validation of a 15-item self-report instrument. Personality Individual Differences 47(6):541–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmonds WA, Kennedy TD (2016) An Applied Guide to Research Designs: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods (Sage Publications, Los Angeles, CA).Google Scholar
• Ehrig T, Schmidt J (2022) Theory‐based learning and experimentation: How strategists can systematically generate knowledge at the edge between the known and the unknown. Strategic Management J. 43(7):1287–1318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Bourgeois LJ III (1988) Politics of strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Acad. Management J. 31(4):737–770.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ericsson KA (2003) Valid and non-reactive verbalization of thoughts during performance of tasks toward a solution to the central problems of introspection as a source of scientific data. J. Consciousness Stud. 10(9–10):1–18.Google Scholar
• Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1980) Verbal reports as data. Psych. Rev. 87(3):215–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1998) How to study thinking in everyday life: Contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind Culture Activity 5(3):178–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans JSB (2018) Dual-process theory: Perspectives and problems. De Neys W, ed. Dual-Process Theory 2.0 (Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, London, UK), 137–155.Google Scholar
• Evans JSB, Stanovich KE (2013) Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspect. Psych. Sci. 8(3):223–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG (2009) Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 41(4):1149–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fedor A, Szathmáry E, Öllinger M (2015) Problem solving stages in the five square problem. Frontiers Psych. 6:1050.Google Scholar
• Fernandes R, Simon HA (1999) A study of how individuals solve complex and ill-structured problems. Policy Sci. 32(3):225–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox MC, Ericsson KA, Best R (2011) Do procedures for verbal reporting of thinking have to be reactive? A meta-analysis and recommendations for best reporting methods. Psych. Bull. 137(2):316–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frankenberger K, Sauer R (2019) Cognitive antecedents of business models: Exploring the link between attention and business model design over time. Long Range Planning 52(3):283–304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman JB (2018) Doing psychological science by hand. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 27(5):315–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman JB, Ambady N (2009) Motions of the hand expose the partial and parallel activation of stereotypes. Psych. Sci. 20(10):1183–1188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman JB, Dale R, Farmer T (2011) Hand in motion reveals mind in motion. Frontiers Psychol. 2:59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fujita K, Trope Y, Cunningham WA, Liberman N (2014) What is control?: A conceptual analysis. Sherman JW, Gawronski B, Trope Y, eds. Dual-Process Theories of the Social Mind (The Guilford Press, New York), 50–65.Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Levinthal D (2000) Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):113–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Levinthal D, Rivkin JW (2005) Strategy making in novel and complex worlds: The power of analogy. Strategic Management J. 26(8):691–712.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghemawat P (1991) Commitment (Simon and Schuster, New York).Google Scholar
• Ghosh S, Wu A (2021) Iterative coordination and innovation: Prioritizing value over novelty. Organ. Sci. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
• Gibbs AJ, Dale MB, Kinns HR, MacKenzie HG (1971) The transition matrix method for comparing sequences; its use in describing and classifying proteins by their amino acid sequences. Systematic Biology 20(4):417–425.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert DT, Wilson TD (2007) Prospection: Experiencing the future. Sci. 317(5843):1351–1354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grégoire DA, Cherchem N (2020) A structured literature review and suggestions for future effectuation research. Small Bus. Econom. 54(3):621–639.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grégoire DA, Barr PS, Shepherd DA (2010) Cognitive processes of opportunity recognition: The role of structural alignment. Organ. Sci. 21(2):413–431.Link, Google Scholar
• Grégoire DA, Binder JK, Rauch A (2019) Navigating the validity tradeoffs of entrepreneurship research experiments: A systematic review and best-practice suggestions. J. Bus. Venturing 34(2):284–310.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR (2018) Show me the data! Improving evidence presentation for publication. Management Organ. Rev. 14(2):423–432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gwet KL (2014) Handbook of Inter-Rater Reliability: The Definitive Guide to Measuring the Extent of Agreement Among Raters (Advanced Analytics, LLC, Gaithersburg, MD).Google Scholar
• Hall J, Watson WH (1970) The effects of a normative intervention on group decision-making performance. Human Relations 23(4):299–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hebb DO (1949) The Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsychological Theory (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Hennig C (2018) fpc: Flexible procedures for clustering. R Package Version 2.1-6.Google Scholar
• Hertwig R, Ortmann A (2001) Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists? Behav. Brain Sci. 24(3):383–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hutzschenreuter T, Kleindienst I (2006) Strategy-process research: What have we learned and what is still to be explored. J. Management 32(5):673–720.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Isenberg DJ (1986) Thinking and managing: A verbal protocol analysis of managerial problem-solving. Acad. Management J. 29(4):775–788.Crossref, Google Scholar
• James W (1890) The Principles of Psychology (Henry Holt & Co., New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson DW, Johnson FP (1982) Joining Together, 2nd ed. (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Joshi MP, Davis EB, Kathuria R, Weidner CK (2005) Experiential learning process: Exploring teaching and learning of strategic management framework through the winter survival exercise. J. Management Ed. 29(5):672–695.Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow (Macmillan, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York).Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Frederick S (2002) Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 49–81.Google Scholar
• Kaufman L, Rousseeuw PJ (1990) Partitioning around medoids (program pam). Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ), 68–125.Google Scholar
• Klingebiel R, De Meyer A (2013) Becoming aware of the unknown: Decision making during the implementation of a strategic initiative. Organ. Sci. 24(1):133–153.Link, Google Scholar
• Krippendorff K (2012) Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology (Sage, Los Angeles, CA).Google Scholar
• Kruglanski AW, Shah JY, Fishbach A, Friedman R, Chun WY, Sleeth-Keppler D (2002) A theory of goal systems. Zanna MP, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 34 (Academic Press, New York), 331–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuusela H, Paul P (2000) A comparison of concurrent and retrospective verbal protocol analysis. Amer. J. Psych. 113(3):387–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lane IM, Mathews RC, Chaney CM, Effmeyer RC, Reber RA, Teddlie CB (1982) Making the goals of acceptance and quality explicit: Effects on group decisions. Small Group Behav. 13(4):542–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langley A, Mintzberg H, Pitcher P, Posada E, Saint-Macary J (1995) Opening up decision making: The view from the black stool. Organ. Sci. 6(3):260–279.Link, Google Scholar
• Laureiro-Martinez D (2014) Cognitive control capabilities, routinization propensity, and decision-making performance. Organ. Sci. 25(4):1111–1133.Link, Google Scholar
• Laureiro‐Martinez D, Brusoni S (2018) Cognitive flexibility and adaptive decision‐making: Evidence from a laboratory study of expert decision makers. Strategic Management J. 39(4):1031–1058.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine SS, Bernard M, Nagel R (2017) Strategic intelligence: The cognitive capability to anticipate competitor behavior. Strategic Management J. 38(12):2390–2423.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewin AY, Chiu CY, Fey CF, Levine SS, McDermott G, Murmann JP, Tsang E (2016) The critique of empirical social science: New policies at management and organization review. Management Organ. Rev. 12(4):649–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lipshitz R, Bar-Ilan O (1996) How problems are solved: Reconsidering the phase theorem. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 65(1):48–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lombard M, Snyder‐Duch J, Bracken CC (2002) Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Comm. Res. 28(4):587–604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahalanobis PC (1936) On the generalized distance in statistics. Proc. National Inst. Sci. India 12:49–55.Google Scholar
• March JG, Sproull LS, Tamuz M (1991) Learning from samples of one or fewer. Organ. Sci. 2(1):1–13.Link, Google Scholar
• Miller EK, Cohen JD (2001) An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Rev. Neuroscience 24(1):167–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H, Raisinghani D, Theoret A (1976) The structure of “unstructured” decision processes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 21(2):246–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mishra H, Mishra A, Nayakankuppam D (2007) Seeing through the heart’s eye: The interference of system 1 in system 2. Marketing Sci. 26(5):666–678.Link, Google Scholar
• Neuendorf KA (2002) The Content Analysis Guidebook (Sage, Los Angeles).Google Scholar
• Nickerson JA, Zenger TR (2004) A knowledge-based theory of the firm—The problem-solving perspective. Organ. Sci. 15(6):617–632.Link, Google Scholar
• Norman DA, Shallice T (1986) Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behaviour. Consciousness and Self-Regulation: Advances in Research and Theory, vol. 4 (Springer, Boston), 1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nutt PC (1984) Types of organizational decision processes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 29(3):414–450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W (1997) Toward an attention‐based view of the firm. Strategic Management J. 18:187–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W (2011) Attention to attention. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1286–1296.Link, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Joseph J (2005) An attention-based theory of strategy formulation: Linking micro-and macroperspectives in strategy processes. Szulanski G, Porac J, Doz Y, eds. Strategy Process (Advances in Strategic Management) vol. 22 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK), 39–61.Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Joseph J (2018) The attention-based view of great strategies. Strategy Sci. 3(1):289–294.Link, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Laamanen T, Vaara E (2018) Communication and attention dynamics: An attention‐based view of strategic change. Strategic Management J. 39(1):155–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oehlert GW (2000) A First Course in Design and Analysis of Experiments (W.H. Freeman, New York).Google Scholar
• Öllinger M, Jones G, Faber AH, Knoblich G (2013) Cognitive mechanisms of insight: The role of heuristics and representational change in solving the eight-coin problem. J. Experiment. Psychology Learn. Memory Cognition 39(3):931–939.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pentland BT (2003a) Conceptualizing and measuring variety in the execution of organizational work processes. Management Sci. 49(7):857–870.Link, Google Scholar
• Pentland BT (2003b) Sequential variety in work processes. Organ. Sci. 14(5):528–540.Link, Google Scholar
• Piezunka H, Schilke O (2023) The dual function of organizational structure: Aggregating and shaping individuals’ votes. Organ. Sci. 34(5):1914–1937.Link, Google Scholar
• Popper KR (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Routledge, New York).Google Scholar
• Posen HE, Levinthal DA (2012) Chasing a moving target: Exploitation and exploration in dynamic environments. Management Sci. 58(3):587–601.Link, Google Scholar
• Posen HE, Keil T, Kim S, Meissner FD (2018) Renewing research on problemistic search—A review and research agenda. Acad. Management Ann. 12(1):208–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P (2018) The Microstructure of Organizations (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rangel A, Camerer C, Montague PR (2008) A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making. Nature Rev. Neuroscience 9(7):545–556.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rasmussen JL (1988) Evaluating outlier identification tests: Mahalanobis D squared and Comrey Dk. Multivariate Behav. Res. 23(2):189–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rittel HW, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4(2):155–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salvato C (2009) Capabilities unveiled: The role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes. Organ. Sci. 20(2):384–409.Link, Google Scholar
• Sarasvathy SD (2001) Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad. Management Rev. 26(2):243–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sarasvathy SD, Simon HA, Lave L (1998) Perceiving and managing business risks: Differences between entrepreneurs and bankers. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 33(2):207–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schacter DL, Addis DR, Buckner RL (2007) Remembering the past to imagine the future: The prospective brain. Nature Rev. Neuroscience 8(9):657–661.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilke O, Levine SS, Kacperczyk O, Zucker LG, eds. (2019) Call for papers—Special issue on experiments in organizational theory. Organ. Sci. 30(1):232–234.Link, Google Scholar
• Schoemann M, O’Hora D, Dale R, Scherbaum S (2021) Using mouse cursor tracking to investigate online cognition: Preserving methodological ingenuity while moving toward reproducible science. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 28(3):766–787.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulte-Mecklenbeck M, Kühberger A, Johnson JG, eds. (2019) A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods (Routledge, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulze A, Brusoni S (2022) How dynamic capabilities change ordinary capabilities: Reconnecting attention control and problem‐solving. Strategic Management J. 43(12):2447–2477.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwenk CR (1985) The use of participant recollection in the modeling of organizational decision process. Acad. Management Rev. 10(3):496–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seligman ME, Railton P, Baumeister RF, Sripada C (2016) Homo Prospectus (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Shepherd DA, McMullen JS, Ocasio W (2017) Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers’ opportunity beliefs for strategic action. Strategic Management J. 38(3):626–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherman JW, Gawronski B, Trope Y, eds. (2014) Dual-Process Theories of the Social Mind (Guilford Publications, New York).Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1947) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 106(6):467–482.Google Scholar
• Stanovich KE, West RF, Toplak ME (2014) Rationality, intelligence, and the defining features of type 1 and type 2 processing. Sherman JW, Gawronski B, Trope Y, eds. Dual-Process Theories of the Social Mind (Guilford Publications, New York), 80–91.Google Scholar
• Steptoe A (1989) An abbreviated version of the Miller behavioral style scale. British J. Clinical Psych. 28(2):183–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor S (2019) The Psychology of Pandemics: Preparing for the Next Global Outbreak of Infectious Disease (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK).Google Scholar
• Travers E, Rolison JJ, Feeney A (2016) The time course of conflict on the cognitive reflection test. Cognition 150:109–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2016) Crossroads—Identifying viable “need–solution pairs”: Problem solving without problem formulation. Organ. Sci. 27(1):207–221.Link, Google Scholar
• Wason PC, Evans JSB (1974) Dual-processes in reasoning? Cognition 3(2):141–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Witte E, Joost N, Thimm AL (1972) Field research on complex decision-making processes—The phase theorem. Internat. Stud. Management Organ. 2(2):156–182.Google Scholar
• Yetton P, Bottger P (1983) The relationships among group size, member ability, social decision schemes, and performance. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 32(2):145–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yu Z, Wang F, Wang D, Bastin M (2012) Beyond reaction times: Incorporating mouse-tracking measures into the implicit association test to examine its underlying process. Soc. Cognition 30(3):289–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zelazo PD, Cunningham WA (2007) Executive function: Mechanisms underlying emotion regulation. Gross JJ, ed. Handbook of Emotion Regulation (Guilford Press, New York), 135–158.Google Scholar