Head, Heart, and Gut in Decision Making: Development of a Multiple Brain Preference Questionnaire

There is a growing body of literature that supports the idea that decision making involves not only cognition, but also emotion and intuition. However, following extant “dual-process” decision theories, the emotional and intuitive aspects of decision making have predominantly been considered as one...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSAGE open Vol. 9; no. 1
Main Authors Soosalu, Grant, Henwood, Suzanne, Deo, Arun
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.01.2019
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
SAGE Publishing
Subjects
Construct Validity
Decision making
Factor Analysis
Heart
Intuition
Preferences
Questionnaires
Validity
coaching
interoception
intuition
decision making
embodied cognition
leadership
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2158-2440
2158-2440
DOI10.1177/2158244019837439

Cover

More Information
Summary:There is a growing body of literature that supports the idea that decision making involves not only cognition, but also emotion and intuition. However, following extant “dual-process” decision theories, the emotional and intuitive aspects of decision making have predominantly been considered as one “experiential” entity. The purpose of this article is to review the neurological evidence for a three-factor model of head, heart, and gut aspects of embodied cognition in decision making and to report on a study carried out to design and validate a psychometric instrument that measures decision-making preferences across three separable interoceptive components, representing the complex, functional, and adaptive neural networks (or “brains”) of head (analytical/cognitive), heart (emotional/affective), and gut (intuition). Development and validation of the Multiple Brain Preference Questionnaire (MBPQ) instrument was carried out in three phases. Translational validity was assessed using content and face validity. Construct validity was undertaken via exploratory factor analysis of the results from the use of the instrument with 301 subjects from a global sampling, and reliability tests were performed using internal consistency and test–retest analysis. Results confirmed extraction of three factors (head, heart, and gut) was appropriate and reliability analysis showed the MBPQ to be both valid and reliable. Applications of the tool to coaching and leadership are suggested.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:2158-2440
2158-2440
DOI:10.1177/2158244019837439