The Melbourne decision making questionnaire: an instrument for measuring patterns for coping with decisional conflict

Journal of Behavioral Decision MakingVolume 10, Issue 1 p. 1-19 Research Article The Melbourne decision making questionnaire: an instrument for measuring patterns for coping with decisional conflict Leon Mann, Corresponding Author Leon Mann University of Melbourne, AustraliaMelbourne Business School, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3053, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorPaul Burnett, Paul Burnett Queensland University of Technology, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorMark Radford, Mark Radford International Survey Research Corporation, SingaporeSearch for more papers by this authorSteve Ford, Steve Ford University of Melbourne, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author Leon Mann, Corresponding Author Leon Mann University of Melbourne, AustraliaMelbourne Business School, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria 3053, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorPaul Burnett, Paul Burnett Queensland University of Technology, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorMark Radford, Mark Radford International Survey Research Corporation, SingaporeSearch for more papers by this authorSteve Ford, Steve Ford University of Melbourne, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 04 December 1998 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199703)10:1<1::AID-BDM242>3.0.CO;2-XCitations: 211AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Abstract A study was conducted to examine the factorial validity of the Flinders Decision Making Questionnaire (Mann, 1982), a 31-item self-report inventory designed to measure tendencies to use three major coping patterns identified in the conflict theory of decision making (Janis and Mann, 1977): vigilance, hypervigilance, and defensive avoidance (procrastination, buck-passing, and rationalization). A sample of 2051 university students, comprising samples from Australia (n=262), New Zealand (n=260), the USA (n=475), Japan (n=359), Hong Kong (n=281) and Taiwan (n=414) was administered the DMQ. Factorial validity of the instrument was tested by confirmatory factor analysis with LISREL. Five different substantive models, representing different structural relationships between the decision-coping patterns had unsatisfactory fit to the data and could not be validated. A shortened instrument, containing 22 items, yielded a revised model comprising four identifiable factors–vigilance, hypervigilance, buck-passing, and procrastination. The revised model had adequate fit with data for each country sample and for the total sample, and was confirmed. It is recommended that the 22-item instrument, named the Melbourne DMQ, replace the Flinders DMQ for measurement of decision-coping patterns. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Citing Literature Volume10, Issue1March 1997Pages 1-19 RelatedInformation