Page 77 - OHS, September 2024

of choice for the two next-step opinions offffered. Rather,respondentspreferredtheoptionofffferedbytheoffifficer
with the industry background (26/40 investigators or 65 percent) over the offifficer with the public safety background (14/40 investi- gators or 35 percent). ThThis preference for the option offffered by the industry investigator occurred regardless of the background of the respondent doing the activity. Discussions with the full investiga- tion group after the activity confirmed that the Industry investi- gators have considerable credibility within the investigation team because of their nuanced understanding of work systems.
Conclusion
This shows how a contextual feature of the decision-making en- vironment, the identity of the person providing the information, biased the judgments of professional OHS investigators. Recall that bias is the systematic deviation from what an impartial assessment of the evidence would support.
This finding of bias is important because it shows that a biasing context can be subtle and still affect choice. In the activity, the cred- ibility of the two officers giving opinions to the PI was relatively comparable. In real-world decision-making, however, it is easy to imagine how a more extreme context could significantly obfus- cate quality decision-making. Imagine, for example, a sub-optimal opinion from a high credibility source, or superior ideas from a less than desirable employee.
Professional investigators work hard to make the best possible judgments to improve the well-being of individuals in the workplace. To combat the subversive effffect of context on decision-making, in- vestigators are urged to be diligent and engage the “slow” system of thinking, to accept that context may bias their judgments without their awareness, and to take steps to mitigate bias.9 Investigators who incorporate bias management into their decision-making can collec- tively move the needle on workplace safety and provide more mean- ingful improvements to the lives of those in the workplace.
Dr. Carla MacLean’s (she/her) academic work explores the theoretical issues underlying expert decision making and cognition and applies them to investigative environments. Dr
MacLean is a full-time faculty mem-
ber in the Department of Psychology at Kwantlen Polytechnic University in British Columbia, Canada. Surveer Boparai (she/her) is an undergraduate student in psychology at Kwantlen Poly- technic University in British Columbia, Canada. S. Boparai’s academics and research has focused on memory, men- tal health and mindfulness, and the influences of context on behavior and decision-making.
REFERENCES
1. tinyurl.com/53tfrt4h 2. tinyurl.com/38rmh8ca 3. tinyurl.com/mvhyzpja 4. tinyurl.com/k3a5unth 5. tinyurl.com/5n6vdnjm 6. tinyurl.com/5n9a4rt3 7. tinyurl.com/5n9a4rt3 8. tinyurl.com/yfv3zvhs 9. tinyurl.com/y8c84849
SEE US AT NSC, BOOTH #2615
www.ohsonline.com
SEPTEMBER 2024 | Occupational Health & Safety 75