This paper presents an integrative review of empirical research (2000–2023) on cognitive biases that affect decision makers in established organizations as they make strategic decisions. We examine patterns in the measures, antecedents, and outcomes of two broad categories of biases: systematic biases that operate similarly across individuals (e.g., overconfidence, escalation of commitment, loss aversion, and myopic loss aversion), and idiosyncratic biases that depend on the decision maker's experience and past interactions (e.g., myopia and local search bias). We also distinguish between findings with strong empirical evidence and those with less empirical support. Our review indicates researchers measure both types of bias using one or more of three broad approaches: assuming or inferring the bias, measuring it directly, and experimentally manipulating the bias and observing its effects. We find strong empirical support for firm ownership, performance or performance relative to aspirations, and CEO compensation and wealth as antecedents to loss aversion and myopic loss aversion. We also find that loss aversion has strong but mixed effects on outcomes such as diversification or internationalization, acquisitions, R&D intensity or investments, and risk taking. Findings with less empirical support include, among others, mostly mixed effects of loss aversion and framing on innovation, mostly positive effects of overconfidence on innovation and risk taking, and negative effects of overconfidence on corporate social responsibility, performance, and forecasting. Based on our findings, we discuss the challenge of identifying and measuring a bias in a way that is relevant to strategic management and suggest directions for future research.

中文翻译：

---

战略决策中的认知偏差综述


本文对实证研究（2000-2023 年）进行了综合回顾，该研究涉及影响成熟组织决策者在做出战略决策时的认知偏差。我们研究了两大类偏倚的测量、前因和结果的模式：在个体之间运作相似的系统性偏倚（例如，过度自信、承诺升级、损失厌恶和近视损失厌恶），以及取决于决策者的经验和过去互动的特殊偏差（例如，近视和局部搜索偏差）。我们还区分了具有强大实证证据的发现和实证支持较少的发现。我们的综述表明，研究人员使用三种广泛方法中的一种或多种来衡量这两种类型的偏差：假设或推断偏差，直接测量偏差，以及通过实验纵偏差并观察其影响。我们发现，公司所有权、绩效或相对于抱负的绩效，以及 CEO 薪酬和财富是损失厌恶和短视损失厌恶的前因，有很强的实证支持。我们还发现，损失厌恶对多元化或国际化、收购、研发强度或投资以及冒险承担等结果具有强烈但混合的影响。实证支持较少的研究结果包括，损失厌恶和框架对创新的混合影响，过度自信对创新和冒险的积极影响，以及过度自信对企业社会责任、绩效和预测的负面影响。根据我们的研究结果，我们讨论了以与战略管理相关的方式识别和衡量偏差的挑战，并为未来的研究方向提出了建议。