|
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
Psychological Factors Influencing Administrative Decision-Making among Educational Leaders: A Cognitive Psychology Perspective |
|
|
|
PP: 915-929 |
|
|
doi:10.18576/jsap/150338
|
|
|
|
Author(s) |
|
|
|
Falah Dhuwaihi Al-Swairi Al-Ajmi,
|
|
|
|
Abstract |
|
|
| This study looked at the psychological factors that shape the way educational leaders take administrative decisions, and read them from the side of cognitive psychology. It aimed to find the cognitive and psychological factors most common among leaders when they reach a decision, to look at the link between some cognitive biases and the quality of those decisions, and to compare analytical thinking with rapid thinking inside the educational setting. The study followed the descriptive approach and used the Delphi technique, where a chosen panel of thirty educational experts answered an electronic questionnaire built on a five-point scale and drawn from the theoretical literature. The answers were summed up by descriptive statistics, and the links were read by a rank-order correlation together with a paired comparison of the two thinking styles. Confidence intervals and effect sizes were worked out to help the reading. The study found that cognitive and psychological factors have a large share in the way educational leaders reach their decisions. Analytical, ordered thinking came first, then rapid intuitive thinking, while tolerance for ambiguity came last. Each bias that was looked at went with a lower quality of decision, and the strongest link was for loss aversion, then confirmation bias, then the framing effect. The comparison of the two styles showed that analytical thinking went with a clearly higher effectiveness than rapid thinking. On this base, the study recommends putting the ideas of cognitive psychology inside the preparation and the professional development of educational leaders, so that they become aware of their own thinking patterns and of how far a bias can reach them, and building programmers that strengthen analytical reasoning and decision-making that stands on evidence. The study adds a cognitive and psychological reading of administrative decision-making beside the organizational and procedural readings that fill the regional literature, and gives a base for later work that ties personal and professional variables to the decision behaviour of leaders. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
