Abstract
This chapter covers the QCA analysis of memberships of outcome conditions, decision confidence and decision competence for each of the individual in-basket simulations. The treatment and measured antecedents are re-explored during the same 2-h experiment and results were recorded for the same participants, in the same physical contexts and all other variables were controlled to remain unaltered. In a way, each of these in-baskets simulations acts as a re-test and repeat of the study. It is important to note that the discipline and level of complexity of the decisions varied substantially for each of the in-basket simulations. The next four sections analyse the raw data gathered from each of the participants, for each of the separate in-baskets and interpret the fsQCA analysis of the truth table and combinations of treatment and measured conditions for each simulation, hereafter referred to as In-basket 1, In-basket 2, In-basket 3 and In-basket 4 respectively.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bandura, A. (1982). Self efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 32(7), 122–147.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1983). Self-evaluative and self-efficacy mechanisms governing the motivational effects of goal systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(5), 1017–1028.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. A. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competent manager: A model for effective performance. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Boyatzis, R. E., Baker, A., Leonard, D., Rhee, K., & Thompson, L. (1995). Will it make a difference? Assessing a value-based, outcome oriented, competency-based professional program. In R. E. Boyatzis, S. S. Cowen, & D. A. Kolb (Eds.), Innovating in professional education: Steps on a journey from teaching to learning (pp. 167–202). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2005). Resonant leadership. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychological Review, 106, 676–713.
Crow, S. M., Fok, L. Y., Hartman, S. J., & Payne, D. M. (1991). Gender and values: What is the impact on decision making? Sex Roles, 25, 255–268.
de Acedo Lizárraga, M. L. S., de Acedo Baquedano, M. T. S., & Elawar, M. C. (2007). Factors that affect decision making: Gender and age differences. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 7(3), 381–391.
Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Fast and frugal heuristics: The tools of bounded rationality. In D. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 62–88). Oxford: Blackwell.
Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Why heuristics work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1), 20–29. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.0058.x.
Goertz, G. (2003). The substantive importance of necessary condition hypotheses. In G. Goertz & H. Starr (Eds.), Necessary Conditions (pp. 65–94). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Hatala, R., & Case, S. M. (2000). Examining the influence of gender on medical students’ decision making. Journal of Women’s Health and Gender Based Medicine, 9, 617–623.
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19(2), 119–137. doi:10.1080/10573560308223.
Mahoney, J. (2007). Qualitative methodology and comparative politics. Comparative Political Studies, 40, 122–144. doi:10.1177/0010414006296345.
Mendel, J. M., & Korjani, M. M. (2012). Charles Ragin’s fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) used for linguistic summarizations. Information Sciences, 202, 1–23.
Ragin, C. C. (2004). Redesigning social inquiry [Slide-show PPT]. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncm.ac.uk/379/1/RSDI-RMF.pdf
Ragin, C. C. (2006). Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage. Political Analysis, 14(3), 291–310. doi:10.1093/pan/mpj019.
Ragin, C. C. (2008a). Online tutorial: Qualitative comparative analysis and fuzzy sets. Retrieved from http://www.fsqca.com
Ragin, C. C. (2008b). Redesigning social inquiry. London: University of Chicago Press Ltd.
Ragin, C. C. (2008c). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Ragin, C. C. (2008d, May 5, 2010). What is qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)? In Symposium conducted at the meeting of the 3rd ESRC Research Methods Festival. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/250/1/What_is_QCA.pdf
Rihoux, B., & Lobe, B. (2008). The case for qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): Adding leverage for thick cross-case comparison. In D. Byrne & C. C. Ragin (Eds.), The Sage handbook of case-based methods (pp. 222–242). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. (2009). Configurational comparative methods. London: Sage.
Schank, R. C. (1994). What we learn when we learn by doing. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Schank, R. C., Fano, A., Jona, M., & Bell, B. (1993). The design of goal-based scenarios. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Ragan, J. R. (1986). Group approaches for improving strategic decision making: A comparative analysis of dialectical inquiry, devil’s advocacy, and consensus. Academic Management Journal, 29(1), 51–71. doi:10.2307/255859.
Schwenk, C. R. (1984). Devil’s advocacy in managerial decision-making. Journal of Management Studies, 21(2), 153–168. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1984.tb00229.x.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday/Currency.
Shaw, P., & Linnecar, R. (2007). Business coaching: Achieving practical results through effective engagement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Simon, H. A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Simon, H. A. (1992). Economics, bounded rationality and the cognitive revolution. Aldershot Hants: Elgar.
Simon, H. A., & Kaplan, C. A. (1989). Foundations of cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tannen, D. (1990). Gender differences in topical coherence: Creating involvement in best friends’ talk. Discourse Processes, 13(1), 73–90.
Tobias, S. (2010). The expertise reversal effect and aptitude treatment interaction research (commentary). Instructional Science, 38(3), 309–314. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9103-z.
Wagemann, C., & Schneider, C. Q. (2010). Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy-Sets: Agenda for a research approach and a data analysis technique. Comparative Sociology, 9(3), 376–396. doi:10.1163/156913210X12493538729838.
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1991). Doing gender. In J. Lorber & S. A. Farrell (Eds.), The social construction of gender (pp. 13–37). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Wood, J. T. (1990). Gendered lives: Communication, gender, and culture. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Woodside, A., de Villiers, R., Marshall, R. (2016). Analytics and Findings for Competency and Confidence. In: Incompetency and Competency Training. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39108-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39108-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-39106-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-39108-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)