Abstract for: Information and worldviews influence in unclear goals decision-making

Literature highlights how decision-makers are highly responsive to the information received, where slight variations (even in format) profoundly impact decisions. These ideas fostered a linear view of information use, central to approaches like evidence-based decision-making, suggesting that providing evidence (e.g., on climate change) can sway decision-makers towards alternative (e.g., more sustainable) actions. However, real-world experiences reveal frequent deviations from this linear model (e.g., marginal impact of sustainability research). Anecdotes show that tasks with clear objects (operational decisions) seem to adhere more to the linear model than with unclear goals (strategic decisions). We hypothesise that with unclear goals, there is no explicit definition of optimal benchmark, so decision-makers may fill this ‘void’ with their worldviews, which become the scope for action and affect information use. 255 decision-makers were recruited to participate in a dynamic decision-making experiment in which information provided and goal clarity were manipulated. Results support the hypothesis. In unclear conditions, information and worldviews affect decisions, with the last being the strongest driver. Preliminary evidence also suggests that decision-makers may be unaware of dealing with unclear tasks. These findings demand deeper consideration of the inherent challenges in strategic decision-making and the true impact of information in unclear goal contexts.