When Holden words his suggestions as positively as possible his managers are more likely to be interested in them because of the bias known as the framing effect?

Alcalde, J., Bond, C. E., and Randle, C. H.: Framing bias: The effect of figure presentation on seismic interpretation, Interpretation, 5, 591–605, https://doi.org/10.1190/INT-2017-0083.1, 2017a. a

Alcalde, J., Bond, C. E., Johnson, G., Butler, R. W. H., Cooper, M. A., and Ellis, J. F.: The importance of structural model availability on seismic interpretation, J. Struct. Geol., 97, 161–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2017.03.003, 2017b. a, b, c, d

Andrews, B. J., Roberts, J. J., Shipton, Z. K., Bigi, S., Tartarello, M. C., and Johnson, G.: How do we see fractures? Quantifying subjective bias in fracture data collection, Solid Earth, 10, 487–516, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-10-487-2019, 2019. a

Araya-Polo, M., Dahlke, T., Frogner, C., Zhang, C., Poggio, T., and Hohl, D.: Automated fault detection without seismic processing, The Leading Edge, 36, 208–214, https://doi.org/10.1190/tle36030208.1, 2017. a

Argent, R. M.: An overview of model integration for environmental applications – components, frameworks and semantics, Environ. Modell. Softw., 19, 219–234, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-8152(03)00150-6, 2004. a, b

Argent, R. M. and Houghton, B.: Land and water resources model integration: Software engineering and beyond, Adv. Environ. Res., 5, 351–359, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1093-0191(01)00086-7, 2001. a, b

Baddeley, M. C., Curtis, A., and Wood, R.: An introduction to prior information derived from probabilistic judgements: Elicitation of knowledge, cognitive bias and herding, in: Geological Prior Information: Informing Science and Engineering, edited by: Curtis, A. and Wood, R., The Geological Society of London, London, UK, 15–27, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.2004.239.01.02, 2004. a

Baddeley, M.: Herding, social influences and behavioural bias in scientific research: Simple awareness of the hidden pressures and beliefs that influence our thinking can help to preserve objectivity, EMBO Rep., 16, 902–905, https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201540637, 2015. a

Barclay, E. J., Renshaw, C. E., Taylor, H. A., and Bilge, A. R.: Improving decision making skill using an online volcanic crisis simulation: Impact of data presentation format, Journal of Geoscience Education, 59, 85–92, https://doi.org/10.5408/1.3543933, 2011. a, b, c, d

Bárdossy, G. and Fodor, J.: Traditional and new ways to handle uncertainty in geology, Natural Resources Research, 10, 179–187, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012513107364, 2001. a

Beaulac, G. and Kenyon, T.: Critical thinking education and debiasing, Informal Log., 34, 341–363, https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v34i4.4203, 2014.

Böckenholt, U.: The cognitive-miser response model: Testing for intuitive and deliberate reasoning, Psychometrika, 77, 388–399, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-012-9251-y, 2012. a

Bond, C. E.: Uncertainty in structural interpretation: Lessons to be learnt, J. Struct. Geol., 74, 185–200, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2015.03.003, 2015. a, b

Bond, C. E., Gibbs, A. D., Shipton, Z. K., and Jones, S.: What do you think this is? “Conceptual uncertainty” in geoscience interpretation, Geological Society of America Today, 17, 4–10, https://doi.org/10.1130/GSAT01711A.1, 2007. a, b, c, d

Bond, C. E., Shipton, Z. K., Gibbs, A. D., and Jones, S.: Structural models: Optimizing risk analysis by understanding conceptual uncertainty, First Break, 26, 65–71, https://doi.org/10.3997/1365-2397.2008006, 2008. a

Bovens, L.: The ethics of nudge, in: Preference change, edited by: Hansson, M. J. and Grüne-Yanoff, T., Springer, Berlin, Germany, 207–219, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2593-7_10, 2009. a

Camerer, C. F. and Hogarth, R. M.: The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework, J. Risk Uncertainty, 19, 7–42, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007850605129, 1999. a

Challen, R., Denny, J., Pitt, M., Gompels, L., Edwards, T., and Tsaneva-Atanasova, K.: Artificial intelligence, bias and clinical safety, BMJ Quality and Safety, 28, 231–237, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008370, 2019. a

Chamberlin, T. C.: The method of multiple working hypotheses, Science, 15, 92–96, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.148.3671.754, 1890. a

Chen, C. and Zhao, B.: Review of relationship between indoor and outdoor particles: I∕O ratio, infiltration factor and penetration factor, Atmos. Environ., 45, 275–288, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.09.048, 2011. a

Cooke, N. M. and McDonald, J. E.: A formal methodology for acquiring and representing expert knowledge, P. IEEE, 74, 1422–1430, https://doi.org/10.1109/PROC.1986.13643, 1986. a

Czaika, E. and Selin, N. E.: Model use in sustainability policy making: An experimental study, Environ. Modell. Softw., 98, 54–62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.09.001, 2017. a

Dawes, R. M. and Corrigan, B.: Linear models in decision making, Psychol. Bull., 81, 95–106, https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037613, 1974. a

Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., and Meehl, P. E.: Clinical versus actuarial Judgment, Science, 24, 1668–1674, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2648573, 1989. a

de Graaf, M. M. and Malle, B. F.: How people explain action (and autonomous intelligent systems should too), in: AAAI Fall Symposium Series, Artificial Intelligence for Human-Robot Interaction, 9–11 November 2017, Arlington, Virgina, 19–26, 2017. a

Di, H.: Developing a seismic pattern interpretation network (SpiNet) for automated seismic interpretation, arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.08517, 2018. a

Downs, J. S., Loewenstein, G., and Wisdom, J.: Eating by the numbers, New York Times, A31, available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/opinion/13lowenstein.html (last access: 28 August 2019), 2009. a

Edwards, D., Morris, J., and Tabbush, P.: Stakeholder participation in the development and use of sustainability impact assessment tools for European land use policies, in: EASY-ECO Conference, Sustainable Development Evaluations in Europe, Brussels, Belgium, 17–19 November, 2010. a

Elliot, L. P. and Brook, B. W.: Revisiting Chamberlin: Multiple working hypotheses for the 21st century, BioScience, 57, 608–614, https://doi.org/10.1641/B570708, 2007. a

Englich, B., Mussweiler, T., and Strack, F.: Playing dice with criminal sentences: The influence of irrelevant anchors on experts judicial decision making, Pers. Soc. Psychol. B., 32, 188–200, https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205282152, 2006. a

Epley, N. and Gilovich, T.: The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient, Psychol. Sci., 17, 311–318, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01704.x, 2006. a, b

Evans, J. S. B. T. and Stanovich, K. E.: Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate, Perspect. Psychol. Sci., 8, 223–241, https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460685, 2013. a, b, c

Fagley, N. S. and Miller, P. M.: Framing effects and arenas of choice: Your money or your life?, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec., 71, 355–373, https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1997.2725, 1997. a

Farrokhnia, F., Kahoo, A. R., and Soleimani, M.: Automatic salt dome detection in seismic data by combination of attribute analysis on CRS images and IGU map delineation, J. Appl. Geophys., 159, 395–407, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2018.09.018, 2018. a

Fogg, B. J.: Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and do, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA, 2003. a

Fischhoff, B.: Debiasing, in: Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, edited by: Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 422–444, 1982. a, b

Fong, G. T., Krantz, D. H., and Nisbett, R. E.: The effects of statistical training on thinking about everyday problems, Cognitive Psychol., 18, 253–292, https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(86)90001-0, 1986.

Frederick, S.: Cognitive reflection and decision making, J. Econ. Perspect., 19, 25–42, https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732, 2005. a

Freeman, B., Boult, P. J., Yielding, G., and Menpes, S.: Using empirical geological rules to reduce structural uncertainty in seismic interpretation of faults, J. Struct. Geol., 32, 1668–1676, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2009.11.001, 2010. a

Frodeman, R.: Geological reasoning: Geology as an interpretive and historical science, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 107, 960–968, https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1995)107<0960:GRGAAI>2.3.CO;2, 1995. a

Garcia-Retamero, R. and Dhami, M. K.: On avoiding framing effects in experienced decision makers, Q. J. Exp. Psychol., 66, 829–842, https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.727836, 2013. a

Gigerenzer, G.: On the supposed evidence for libertarian paternalism, Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6, 361–383, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-015-0248-1, 2015. a

Gil, Y., David, C. H., Demir, I., Essawy, B. T., Fulweiler, R. W., Goodall, J. L., Karlstrom, L., Lee, H., Mills, H. J., Oh, J., Pierce, S. A., Pope, A., Tzeng, M. W., Villamizar, S. R., and Yu, Z.: Toward the geoscience paper of the future: best practices for documenting and sharing research from data to software to provenance, Earth Space Sci., 3, 388–415, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015EA000136, 2016. a

Gil, Y., Pierce, S. A., Babaie, H., Banerjee, A., Borne, K., Bust, G., Cheatham, M., Ebert-Uphoff, I., Gomes, C., Hill, M., Horel, J., Hsu, L., Kinter, J., Knoblock, C., Krum, D., Kumar, V., Lermusiaux, P., Liu, C., North, C., Pankratius, V., Peters, S., Plale, B., Pope, A., Ravela, S., Restrepo, J., Ridley, A., Samet, H., and Shekhar, S.: Intelligent systems for geosciences: an essential research agenda, Commun ACM, 62, 76–84, https://doi.org/10.1145/3192335, 2018. a

Gilbert, G. K.: The inculcation of scientific method by example, with an illustration drawn from the Quaternary geology of Utah, Am. J. Sci., 31, 284–299, https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.s3-31.184.284, 1886. a

Gilovich, T., Griffin, D. W., and Kahneman, D. (Eds.): Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2002. a

Hemming, V., Walshe, T. V., Hanea, A. M., Fidler, F., and Burgman, M. A.: Eliciting improved quantitative judgements using the IDEA protocol: A case study in natural resource management, PloS One, 13, e0198468, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198468, 2018. a

Henderson, C., Mestre, J. P., and Slakey, L. L.: Cognitive Science Research Can Improve Undergraduate STEM Instruction: What Are the Barriers?, Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2, 51–60, https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215601115, 2015.

Holden, M. H. and Ellner, S. P.: Human judgment vs. quantitative models for the management of ecological resources, Ecol. Appl., 26, 1553–1565, https://doi.org/10.1890/15-1295, 2016. a

Johnson, E. J. and Goldstein, D.: Do defaults save lives?, Science, 302, 1338–1339, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091721, 2003. a

Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York, 2011. a

Kahneman, D. and Frederick, S.: A model of heuristic judgment, in: The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, edited by: Holyoak, K. J. and Morrison, R. G., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 267–293, 2002. a

Kahneman, D. and Frederick, S.: Frames and brains: Elicitation and control of response tendencies, Trends Cogn. Sci., 11, 45–46, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.007, 2007. a

Karpatne, A., Ebert-Uphoff, I., Ravela, S., Babaie, H. A., and Kumar, V.: Machine learning for the geosciences: Challenges and opportunities, IEEE T. Knowl Data En., 31, 1544–1554, https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2018.2861006, 2018. a

Kempler, L. and Gross, S.: Teaching Quantitative Thinking in Geoscience with MATLAB, Geophys. Res. Abstr., EGU2018-19379, EGU General Assembly 2018, Vienna, Austria, 2018.

Koparan, C., Koc, A., Privette, C., and Sawyer, C.: In situ water quality measurements using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system, Water, 10, 264–278, https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030264, 2018. a

Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., and Fischhoff, B.: Reasons for confidence, J. Exp. Psychol.-Hum. L., 6, 107, https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.107, 1980. a

Larrick, R. P.: Debiasing, in: Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, edited by: Koehler, D. J. and Harvey, N., Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Hoboken, NJ, 316–337, 2004. a, b, c

Larrick, R. P., Morgan, J., and Nisbett, R. E.: Teaching the use of cost-benefit reasoning in everyday life, Psychol. Sci., 1, 362–370, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1990.tb00243.x, 1990.

Larrick, R. P., Nisbett, R. E., and Morgan, J.: Who uses the normative rules of choice, in: Rules for Reasoning, edited by: Nisbett, R. E., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, 277–294, 1993.

Lerner, J. S. and Tetlock, P.: Accounting for the effects of accountability, Psychol. Bull., 125, 255–275, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255, 1999. a

Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., and Gaeth, G. J.: All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec., 76, 149–188, https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2804, 1998. a

Lindberg, D. C.: Galileo, the church, and the cosmos, in: When Science and Christianity Meet, edited by: Lindberg, D. C. and Numbers, R. L., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 33–60, 2003. a

Lorenz, J., Rauhut, H., Schweitzer, F., and Helbing, D.: How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 9020–9025, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1008636108, 2011. a

Ly, K., Mažar, N., Zhao, M., and Soman, D.: A practitioner's guide to nudging, Rotman School of Management Working Paper, 2609347, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2609347, 2013. a

Madrian, B. C. and Shea, D. F.: The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior, Q. J. Econ., 116, 1149–1187, https://doi.org/10.3386/w7682, 2001. a

Manduca, C. A., Baer, E., Hancock, G., Macdonald, R. H., Patterson, S., Savina, M., and Wenner, J.: Making undergraduate geoscience quantitative, EOS T. Am. Geophys. Un., 89, 149–150, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008EO160001, 2008.

Macrae, E. J., Bond, C. E., Shipton, Z. K., and Lunn, R. J.: Increasing the quality of seismic interpretation, Interpretation, 4, T395–T402, https://doi.org/10.1190/INT-2015-0218.1, 2016. a, b, c, d, e, f, g

McIntosh, B., Voinov, A., and Giupponi, C.: Bridging the gaps between design and use: developing appropriate tools for environmental management and policy, in: Environmental Modelling, Software and Decision Support, edited by: Jakeman, A. J., Voinov, A. A., Rizzoli, A. E., and Chen, S. H., Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 33–48, 2008. a

McIntosh, B. S., Jeffrey, P., Lemon, M., and Winder, N.: On the design of computer-based models for integrated environmental science, Environ. Manage., 35, 741–752, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0172-0, 2005. a

McNeil, B. J., Pauker, S. G., Sox, H. C., and Tversky, A.: On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies, New Engl. J. Med., 306, 1259–1262, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198205273062103, 1982. a

Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., and Bazerman, M. H.: How can decision making be improved?, Perspect. Psychol. Sci., 4, 379–383, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01142.x, 2009. a, b

Miller, T.: Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences, Artif. Intell., 267, 1–38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007, 2019. a

Mirsch, T., Lehrer, C., and Jung, R.: Digital nudging: altering user behavior in digital environments, in: Proceedings der 13. Internationalen Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 12–15 February 2017, 634–648, 2017. a

Mussweiler, T., Strack, F., and Pfeiffer, T.: Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility, Pers. Soc. Psychol. B, 26, 1142–1150, https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002611010, 2000. a

Ore, J. P., Elbaum, S., Burgin, A., and Detweiler, C.: Autonomous aerial water sampling, J. Field Robot., 32, 1095–1113, https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.21591, 2015. a

Oxley, T., McIntosh, B. S., Winder, N., Mulligan, M., and Engelen, G.: Integrated modelling and decision-support tools: a Mediterranean example, Environ. Modell. Softw., 19, 999–1010, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2003.11.003, 2004. a

Phillips, L. D.: Group elicitation of probability distributions: Are many heads better than one?, in: Decision Science and Technology, edited by: Shanteau, J., Mellers, B. A., and Schum, D. A., Springer, Boston, Massachusetts, 313–330, 1999. a, b

Polson, D. and Curtis, A.: Dynamics of uncertainty in geological interpretation, J. Geol. Soc. London, 167, 5–10, https://doi.org/10.1144/0016-76492009-055, 2010. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h

Qian, F., Jerolmack, D., Lancaster, N., Nikolich, G., Reverdy, P., Roberts, S., Shipley, T. F., Van Pelt, R. S., Zobeck, T. M., and Koditschek, D. E.: Ground Robotic Measurement of Aeolian Processes, Aeolian Res., 27, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2017.04.004, 2017. a

Randle, C. H., Bond, C. E., Lark, R. M., and Monaghan, A. A.: Uncertainty in geological interpretations: Effectiveness of expert elicitations, Geosphere, 15, 108–118, https://doi.org/10.1130/GES01586.1, 2019. a, b

Rankey, E. C. and Mitchell, J. C.: That's why it's called interpretation: Impact of horizon uncertainty on seismic attribute analysis, The Leading Edge, 22, 820–828, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1614152, 2003. a, b

Rizzo, M. J. and Whitman, D. G.: Little brother is watching you: New paternalism on the slippery slopes, Arizona Law Review, 51, 685–739, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1119325, 2009. a

Rizzoli, A. E. and Young, W. J.: Delivering environmental decision support systems: software tools and techniques, Environ. Modell. Softw., 12, 237–249, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-8152(97)00016-9, 1997. a, b

Rowbotham, P., Kane, P., and Bentley, M.: Bias in geophysical interpretation: The case for multiple deterministic scenarios, The Leading Edge, 29, 590–595, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3422459, 2010. a, b

Sanna, L. J. and Schwarz, N.: Metacognitive experiences and human judgment: The case of hindsight bias and its debiasing, Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 15, 172–176, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00430.x, 2006. a

Shanteau, J., Weiss, D. J., Thomas, R. P., and Pounds, J. C.: Performance-based assessment of expertise: How to decide if someone is an expert or not, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 136, 253–263, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00113-8, 2002. a

Shipley, T. F. and Tikoff, B.: Collaboration, cyberinfrastructure, and cognitive science: The role of databases and dataguides in 21st century Structural Geology, J. Struct. Geol., 125, 48–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2018.05.007, 2018. a, b

Skeem, J. L. and Lowenkamp, C. T.: Risk, race, and recidivism: Predictive bias and disparate impact, Criminology, 54, 680–712, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2687339, 2016. a

Soll, J. B., Milkman, K. L., and Payne, J. W.: A user's guide to debiasing, in: Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, 2nd Edn., edited by: Keren, G. and Wu, G., Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Hoboken, NJ, 506–951, 2016. a, b

Spino, R.: Big data and artificial intelligence analytics in geosciences: Promises and potential, Geological Society of America Today, 29, 42–43, https://doi.org/10.1130/GSATG372GW.1, 2019. a

Stanovich, K. E.: The thinking that IQ tests miss, Scientific American Mind, 20, 34–39, 2009. a

Stanovich, K. E. and West, R. F.: Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?, Behav. Brain Sci., 23, 645–726, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098.026, 2000. a

Taylor, H. A., Renshaw, C. E., and Jensen, M. D.: Effects of computer-based role-playing on decision making skills, J. Educ. Comput. Res., 17, 147–164, https://doi.org/10.2190/Y1CX-XU4G-KDFK-JBFJ, 1997. a, b, c, d, e

Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R.: Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 2008. a, b

Thiele, S. T., Grose, L., Samsu, A., Micklethwaite, S., Vollgger, S. A., and Cruden, A. R.: Rapid, semi-automatic fracture and contact mapping for point clouds, images and geophysical data, Solid Earth, 8, 1241–1253, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-8-1241-2017, 2017. a

Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D.: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice, Science, 211, 453–458, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683, 1981. a, b

Vasuki, Y., Holden, E. J., Kovesi, P., and Micklethwaite, S.: Semi-automatic mapping of geological Structures using UAV-based photogrammetric data: An image analysis approach, Comput. Geosci., 69, 22–32, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2014.04.012, 2014. a

Vasuki, Y., Holden, E. J., Kovesi, P., and Micklethwaite, S.: An interactive image segmentation method for lithological boundary detection: A rapid mapping tool for geologists, Comput. Geosci., 100, 27–40, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2016.12.001, 2017. a

Vine, F. J.: The continental drift debate, Nature, 266, 19–22, https://doi.org/10.1038/266019a0, 1977. a

Watkins, H., Bond, C. E., Healy, D., and Butler, R. W.: Appraisal of fracture sampling methods and a new workflow to characterise heterogeneous fracture networks at outcrop, J. Struct. Geol., 72, 67–82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2015.02.001, 2015. a

Weinmann, M., Schneider, C., and vom Brocke, J.: Digital nudging, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng., 58, 433–436, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-016-0453-1, 2016. a

Whitworth, B.: Polite computing, Behav. Inform. Technol., 24, 353–363, https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290512331333700, 2005. a

Wood, R. and Curtis, A.: Geological prior information and its applications to geoscientific problems, Geol. Soc. Spec Publ., 239, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.2004.239.01.01, 2004. a, b

Zhang, Y., Wang, G., Li, M., and Han, S.: Automated Classification Analysis of Geological Structures Based on Images Data and Deep Learning Model, Appl. Sci., 8, 2493, https://doi.org/10.3390/app8122493, 2018. a

When Luke words his suggestions as positively as possible his managers are more likely to be interested in them because of the bias known as the framing effect True False?

What is the usual state of affairs in managerial decision making?

Which of the following groups is most likely to experience groupthink?

Which of the following is the most constructive type of conflict?