The Decision-Making Process Explained
Correction Decision Making

The Decision-Making Process Explained

Corrected by Emir Baycan · on When Notes Fly · 29 July 2026 · View published page ↗

Decision-making involves recognizing choices, defining criteria, generating options, evaluating trade-offs, and making informed selections.

Factually incorrect

What was corrected

What the page claimed

Article implied Dan Lovallo co-authored Kahneman and Sibony's 2021 book 'Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment,' when Lovallo only co-authored a separate 2011 HBR article on cognitive bias; the book's actual third co-author is legal scholar Cass Sunstein, and the 'noise' concept itself was developed later than the 2011 piece the article credited it to. It also cited a 2019 Evan Carter meta-analysis as published in 'Perspectives on Psychological Science,' when the real Carter meta-analysis was published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, and mischaracterized Malte Friese's 2019 paper as a 'preregistered replication' when it was actually a critical review of the evidence. Finally, it attributed a 'twice as likely' financial-performance statistic to a 2017 McKinsey study of '1,000 large organizations,' when the real 2017 McKinsey piece was an executive survey (not an organization count) that didn't contain this specific finding - the 'twice as likely' figure actually traces to a separate, later McKinsey survey.

What was corrected

The Kahneman/Sibony/Lovallo passage rewritten to correctly separate the 2011 HBR article (bias-focused, three co-authors) from the 2021 book (noise-focused, correct co-authors including Sunstein). The ego-depletion passage corrected to the real journal for the Carter meta-analysis and accurately describes Friese's paper as a critical review rather than a replication, while still correctly noting the real large-scale preregistered replication effort exists. The McKinsey statistic reframed to accurately attribute the 'twice as likely' finding without the specific unverified '1,000 organizations, 2017' framing.

Why this is better

Independent verification found this article was substantially cleaner than most in this batch - the Danziger/Levav parole-judge study, Gigerenzer's real 1/N portfolio research (14 models, 7 markets), the Challenger disaster analysis, and Amazon's 2015 two-way-door shareholder letter were all verified as fully accurate with correct figures.

More by Emir Baycan in Decision Making

All of Emir Baycan's contributions →