How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making
One book, placed in its field — what Ryan Hamilton's book gets right, where it goes further than the rest, and what the rest of the field adds.
Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide · bicycle.guide/guides/profile-how_you_decide_the_science_of_human_decision_making
Arrow keys or swipe to move · N for notes · F for full screen
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making
One book, placed in its field — what Ryan Hamilton's book gets right, where it goes further than the rest, and what the rest of the field adds.
Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide · bicycle.guide/guides/profile-how_you_decide_the_science_of_human_decision_making
The problem
Decision outcome and behavior erodes when it is left to instinct instead of method.
You were taught the moves piecemeal, never the whole model.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
The model
- 01Informational Context and Framing
- 02Cognitive Load and Executive Resources
- 03Motivational State
- 04Emotional State
- 05System 1 / System 2 Processing Mode
- 06Use of Heuristics and Simplifying Decision Rules
- 07Social Influence
- 08Decision Outcome and Behavior
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
Step 1 of 5 · Informational Context and Framing
The same data framed as a loss motivates more strongly than framed as a gain, so match the frame to the action you want.
Misconception
People believe that as long as the underlying facts are identical, the way you word or arrange them won't change a rational person's choice.
Reality
Logically equivalent frames produce systematically different choices because the mind evaluates against reference points and relative comparisons, not absolute values—'90% survival' and '10% mortality' are the same fact but not the same decision.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
Step 2 of 5 · Cognitive Load and Executive Resources
Decision quality degrades predictably with accumulated self-control and choices earlier in the day.
Misconception
Practitioners assume willpower and mental sharpness are stable traits, so a good decision-maker should be equally reliable at 9 a.m. and 6 p.m.
Reality
Executive resources are consumed within a day by prior self-control, choices, and distraction; the same skilled mind produces measurably worse judgment when that reservoir runs low, independent of how smart or motivated the person is.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
Step 3 of 5 · Motivational State
Motivation determines direction, not just intensity—two equally motivated people can want opposite things.
Misconception
People treat motivation as a single dial of intensity—more motivated equals better decisions—rather than a set of qualitatively different orientations.
Reality
Regulatory focus, active subselves, and consistency drives don't just energize a decision; they redirect it, making a person promotion-focused and eager to gain in one moment and prevention-focused and loss-averse in the next, altering which heuristics get trusted.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
Step 4 of 5 · Emotional State
Same-valence emotions diverge: fear makes you cautious, anger makes you bold.
Misconception
Practitioners believe emotions are just positive or negative interference to be suppressed for a clear-headed decision.
Reality
Emotions carry appraisal structure that shapes choice in predictable ways: fear (low certainty, low control) raises risk aversion while anger (high certainty, high control) raises risk-seeking, even though both are negative—so which emotion you feel matters more than whether it's pleasant.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
Step 5 of 5 · System 1 / System 2 Processing Mode
The default relationship is approval, not oversight—System 2 mostly ratifies System 1.
Misconception
People imagine System 2 as a rational supervisor that reliably checks System 1's impulses whenever the stakes are high.
Reality
System 2 usually approves System 1's suggestions without inspection and is easily fooled into feeling like it did the work; genuine override is effortful, rare, and requires a specific trigger of doubt, so 'thinking it through' often means retroactively justifying the intuition.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
A framework to use
The Four Rs of Decision Making
This framework is part of the full guide. See the guide →
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
The cheat sheet
- Informational Context and FramingThe same data framed as a loss motivates more strongly than framed as a gain, so match the frame to the action you want.
- Cognitive Load and Executive ResourcesDecision quality degrades predictably with accumulated self-control and choices earlier in the day.
- Motivational StateMotivation determines direction, not just intensity—two equally motivated people can want opposite things.
- Emotional StateSame-valence emotions diverge: fear makes you cautious, anger makes you bold.
- System 1 / System 2 Processing ModeThe default relationship is approval, not oversight—System 2 mostly ratifies System 1.
- Use of Heuristics and Simplifying Decision RulesAnchors contaminate estimates even when you know they're arbitrary and irrelevant.
- Social InfluenceReciprocation manufactures obligations you never agreed to; a favor is not a contract.
- Decision Outcome and BehaviorA good outcome does not prove a good decision; separate the two to learn correctly.
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide
Sources
- How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making — Ryan Hamilton
How You Decide: The Science of Human Decision Making · Mike West, Editor · HR Leader Guide