The decision-making diary: understanding (d/mis)information flows to make better decisions
Pre-requisites
There is no prior knowledge needed for students to do this exercise.
Explanation of activity
This exercise is designed to reflect on how (dis)information influences decision making, where we want students to reflect, analyse and discuss different (m/dis)information that they encounter in their daily life. Each week students fill in a template that supports them with navigating a situation and the decision making process.
Teacher materials
Educators can provide students with inspiration questions such as:
- Why did I forward this post/meme/video/article to my friend/family?
- Why did this post/meme/video/article make me worried/sad/anxious?
- Why did this post/meme/video/article make me happy/excited?
- Does this post make me want to vote for/against something?
- Does this post make me change my opinion about something?
Educators can contextualise this exercise by using real life examples of formats that use decision making diary structures such as risk assessments, product development, policy briefs, communications campaigns, etc.
Relevant reading to understand the materials:
- Baker, Z. (2023) ‘Young people engaging in event-based diaries: A reflection on the value of diary methods in higher education decision-making research’, Qualitative Research, 23(3), pp. 686–705. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941211048403.
- Bazir, A.H. (2016) ‘The Role of Writing Diary in a Classroom’.
- Schmitz, B., Klug, J., & Schmidt, M. (2011). Assessing self-regulated learning using diary measures with university students. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 251–266). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
- Bolger, N., Davis, A. and Rafaeli, E. (2003) ‘Diary Methods: Capturing Life as it is Lived’, Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), pp. 579–616. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030.
- Zimmerman, D. H., & Wieder, D. L. (1977). The Diary: Diary-Interview Method. Urban Life, 5(4), 479-498. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124167700500406
- Hyers, L.L. (2018) Diary Methods: Understanding Qualitative Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press USA – OSO (Understanding Qualitative Research).
Further reading to further develop the activity/understanding of the topic:
- Gordon, H.J. (2015) ‘Seeking Resources when Exhausted: A Daily Diary Study on Decision Making and Performance’, in CRAFT YOUR JOB! Improving Well-being, Decision Making, and Performance in Healthcare. Available at: https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/3949793/794729.pdf#page=118
- Kahneman, D., Sibony, O. and Sunstein, C.R. (2021) Noise: a flaw in human judgment. London: William Collins.
- Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Available at: http://dspace.vnbrims.org:13000/jspui/bitstream/123456789/2224/1/Daniel-Kahneman-Thinking-Fast-and-Slow-.pdf
- Alliance for Decision Education (no date) Exploring Books on Decision-Making, Alliance for Decision Education. Available at: https://alliancefordecisioneducation.org/resources/resource-books/
Student Materials
Educators can use the template below as a base to build their own example for their class.
| Decision No: 01 | Date |
|---|---|
|
Mental/Physical state: https://www.hoffmaninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/Practices-FeelingsSensations.pdf – … – … -… |
|
|
The situation or context (include where and from whom you read/heard about it) The problem statement or frame The variables that govern the situation The complications or complexity as you see it Any assumptions you made What you expect to happen, the alternative options (i.e. what else could you have decided?) and probabilities you assign to each projected outcome What did I decide/conclude? Why any alternatives were not chosen |
|
| Review of Decision No: 01 | Date |
|---|---|
|
Mental/Physical state: https://www.hoffmaninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/Practices-FeelingsSensations.pdf |
|
|
What happened and what did you learn? |
|
Analysis of Student Understanding
In this section, we review the ability of students to critically reflect.
- Are students able to identify information flows? From whom are they getting information? On what medium? What do they do with this information? Where do they spread them to?
- When students consider different variables, do they make binary choices or a range of choices?
- In their decision-making, are they able to identify overthinking, inability to make a decision, inability to remove variables, or do they trust their gut/friends implicitly?
- In their reflection, do they approach the reflection with self-justification of their decision? With criticism? Contextualisation? With more information?
Assessing and Evaluation
The SPACE MCAT framework provides an empirical understanding whether students are able to understand information by taking specific steps to analyse and interpret information.
In assessing if students have understood the materials, educators should reflect on the following:
- Were students able to identify what exactly they are deciding on? (i.e. do they have clarity of the situation and its context?)
- Are students able to identify information flows? From whom are they getting information? On what medium? What do they do with this information? Where do they spread them to?
- When students consider different variables, do they make binary choices or a range of choices?
- In their decision-making, are they able to identify overthinking, inability to make a decision, inability to remove variables, or do they trust their gut/friends implicitly?
- In their reflection, do they approach the reflection with self-justification of their decision? With criticism? Contextualisation? With more information?
To evaluate student understanding of the materials, educators can engage in the following examinations:
- Review the diary with the grading rubric below (see grading rubric)
- Ask students to write a reflection report
Grading rubric
|
Criterion |
Insufficient 0-49% |
Sufficient 50-59% |
Adequate 60-69% |
Good 70-84% |
Excellent 85-100% |
|
Accuracy (40%) |
The assignment fails to follow the expected format and structure of the assignment. The number of required submissions has not been reached. The quality of the decision making diary or the concluding report is exceedingly poor. |
The assignment is poorly thought through and/or the number of required submissions has not been reached. The overall quality is subpar in terms of content and professionalism. |
The assignment is presented in a generally adequate but lackluster fashion. Some sections and elements of the diary lack sufficient information, background or vision to fully assess the decision making process. |
The assignment is presented in a most satisfactory manner. The various elements are included and generally solidly written however some sections or elements are not as detailed as they ought to be. |
The assignment is presented in a most comprehensive and professional manner. The various expected elements and sections are included and fully explained or described. |
|
Alternative options (30%) |
The alternative options was not completed or lacked reflection |
The alternative options were poorly thought through and/or the number of required submission were not reached |
The alternative options were presented in a generally adequate but lackluster fashion |
The alternative options were presented in a most satisfactory manner where there was careful consideration for different options |
The alternative options presented were comprehensive and professional. The different options were fully explained and described |
|
Decision review (20%) |
The decision review was not completed or lacked a reflection of the outcome(s) |
The decision review was completed but lacked a reflection of the outcome(s) |
The decision review was completed but was short and did not reflect thoroughly on the decision |
The decision review was completed and showed a careful consideration of the impact of the decision |
The decision review was completed and showed an in depth understanding and reflection of the impact of the decision |
|
Structure/ Language (10%) |
Structure is confusing and makes it hard to make out the key points made. Use of language is poor and contains several errors |
Structure is somewhat confusing and makes it hard to make out the key points made. Use of language is ok. |
Overall structure is clear, with a maximum of two unclear sentences. Use of language is ok, with maximum two errors |
Structure is clear throughout with no unclear sentences. Good use of language with no errors |
Requirement for good, plus the structure and use of language are exceptionally clear |
Modulations
- Educators can focus on aligning a class with a decision
- Alternative reflection report questions:
- Are the outcomes of decisions as you planned?
- Are your assumptions usually correct?
- Do you often suffer from the same cognitive biases or mental shortcuts?
- Do you make poor decisions under certain emotional states?
- Are you more anxious or confident about certain types of decisions?
- Are your poorest decisions made at certain times of the day?
- Did you have access to all the required information?
- Were all options considered?
- Were you feeling at your best when you made each decision?
- Was a decision based more on intuition, or data?
- Does the quality of a decision always equate to the quality of the outcome?
- Do you always act on your decisions?
- What might you do differently next time?
- At MA level, instead of grading the decision making diary itself. Educators can connect the decision making diary with the theory outlined in “Thinking Fast and Slow”. This book is a 2011 popular science book by psychologist Daniel Kahneman. The book’s main thesis is a differentiation between two modes of thought: “System 1” is fast, instinctive and emotional; “System 2” is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The book delineates rational and non-rational motivations or triggers associated with each type of thinking process, and how they complement each other. You can connect the decisionmaking diary and add a final exercise to identify whether their decisions were made using System 1 or Systems 2, biases, heuristics, etc. The final report then is submitted for grading in which they analyse their own understanding of how they navigate information.
