Head, heart, and gut in decision making : development of a multiple brain preference questionnaire
Loading...
Supplementary material
Other Title
Authors
Soosalu, G.
Henwood, Suzanne
Deo, Arun
Henwood, Suzanne
Deo, Arun
Author ORCID Profiles (clickable)
Degree
Grantor
Date
2019-01-01
Supervisors
Type
Journal Article
Ngā Upoko Tukutuku (Māori subject headings)
Keyword
Multiple Brain Preference Questionnaire (MBPQ)
decision making
intuition
interoception
embodied cognition
coaching
leadership
head brain
gut brain
heart brain
neuroscience
decision making
intuition
interoception
embodied cognition
coaching
leadership
head brain
gut brain
heart brain
neuroscience
ANZSRC Field of Research Code (2020)
Citation
Soosalu, G., Henwood, S., & Deo, A. (2019). Head, Heart, and Gut in Decision Making: Development of a Multiple Brain Preference Questionnaire. SAGE Open, Open Access, 1-17. doi:10.1177/2158244019837439
Abstract
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.
Publisher
SAGE
Permanent link
Link to ePress publication
DOI
doi:10.1177/2158244019837439
Copyright holder
Copyright notice
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage)..