TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title page i
Certification ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgments iv
Table of Contents v
List of Tables vi
Abstract vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
Statement of the Problem                                                                            14
Purpose of the Study                                                                                  15
Operational Definition of Terms                                                                 16
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 18
Theoretical Review                                                                                   18
Prospect Theory                                                                                                        18
Social Cognitive Theory                                                                                           20
Dynamic Decision-making Theory (DDM) Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 22
Instance-Based Learning Theory (IBLT) Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 24
Empirical Review                                                                                   26
Effects of framing on decision making                                                         26
Certainty Effects on Decision Making                                                       30
Gender differences on decision making                                            33
Moderating role of risk perception on framing, certainty and gender effects on decision making                                                                       35
Summary of Literature Review                                                            39
Hypotheses 40
CHAPTER THREE: METHOD 41
Participants 41
Instruments                                                                                              41
Procedure 44
Design/Statistics 47
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS 48
Summary of Findings                                                                          51
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 52
Implications of the Study                                                                               58
Limitations of the Study                                                                          61
Suggestions for Further Studies                                                                61
Summary and Conclusion                                                                         61
REFERENCES 63
APPENDICES
71
LIST OF TABLE
Table 1: Descriptive statistics table showing mean and standard deviation of security strategy decision scores based on framing, certainty and gender. 48
Table 2: ANOVA results for effects of framing, certainty and gender on security strategy decision. 49
Table 3: Moderation table of risk perception for
framing, certainty and gender
on security strategy decision 50
ABSTRACT
This study used
a 2x2x2 factorial design to examine framing, certainty and gender effects on
security strategy decision. One hundred and twenty (60 male, 60 female) first
year students of psychology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, whose ages ranged
from 16-29 years (M = 20.35 years, SD =2.85 years) participated in the study.
Framing was varied into positive and negative framing conditions certainty was
varied into certainty and uncertainty conditions, while gender was categorized
into male and female. The domain specific risk taking scale for the adult
population, tackling insecurity in Nigeria, and the security strategy decision
inventory were the study materials used to measure risk perception, manipulate
framing and certainty, and assess security strategy decision respectively.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) result revealed significant main effects of
framing and certainty on security strategy decision, F(1, 112) = 97.80, p < .001
and F(1, 112) = 169.95, p < .001 respectively. Gender, however, had no
significant effect on security strategy decision. Moderated regression analysis
showed that risk perception significantly moderated the relationship between
certainty and security strategy decision (β =.36, t = 3.78, p < .001). The
interaction effect between framing and gender was significant, F (1, 112) =
7.58, p < .01. The implications and limitations of these findings were
discussed and suggestions were made for future studies.
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
Every day, people are inundated with numerous decision scenarios, big, small and even those that could not be easily classified (Dietrich, 2010). Decision making reflects the process of arriving at a conclusion after much consideration has been made about which action to take and the ones to avoid, as well as the possible outcome of such actions (Ibeanu & Momoh, 1998). It is the process by which an individual selects from available options or alternatives after due or partial considerations (Coleman, 2003). According to Stanovich and West (2008), decision making is the act of choosing between or from two or more causes of action. People choose action or form opinions via mental processes which are influenced by their psychological, environmental and/or economical states at the time, and the perceived available cognitive and mental resources. Thus, individuals and/or groups always strive to make choices that could result in their physical or psychological well-being either on the immediate or long- term (Acevedo & Krueger, 2004).
The psychological and mental state of a decision maker is predominantly a function of the relative calm, peace, ease, security and/or insecurity available, and his or her perception of such safety and security. Security relates to the available peace, calm, and lack or absence of threats to the life of the citizens of a state (Adebakin, 2012; Bilings & Lisa, 1988; Daniels, 1999). Security implies the avoidance of harm or discomfort, provision of physical and psychological safety, freedom from fear and protection from physical, emotional and psychological injuries, and it has been shown to be the second most important need of humans after food, air and shelter (Maslow, 1970), and ranks as a major concern of individuals either in their domestic, workplace or religious domains.
The psychobiology of security (just as in other emotional reactions) shows that environmental stimuli are interpreted by the amygdale (the emotional brain) as friendly or threat to an individual’s psychological resources, and an interpretation of a stimulus as threat results in feeling of insecurity that manifests in muscle tension, increased heartbeat, dryness of the throat and mouth, sweating, irritability, trembling, frequent urination, hyper-sensitivity and alertness to loud or strange sounds, and restlessness. These reactions are nearly universal because they are caused by the activation of the autonomous nervous system which is the neural circuit that links the internal organs (heart, liver, kidney etc) with the brain (amygdale) (Nwanegbo & Odigbo, 2015).
Researchers (Ogbonnaya & Ehigiamusoe, 2012; Jou, Shanteau, & Harris, 1996) maintained that security or relative absence of threats to human life and properties has a significant impact on people’s ability to concentrate on a given task while insecurity results in role confusion, poor concentration, increased negative emotional reaction and work accidents. The authors documented the psychological implications of insecurity to include fear, anxiety, apprehension, poor concentration, poor judgment/reasoning, restlessness, among others. Conversely, increased work output, precision in judgment, adequate concentration, calm and psychological and physical well-being have been documented as a function of security or perceived safety of lives and property.
In a bid to provide adequate security to its citizens and staff members, different states/governments, organizations and firms adopt several long-term security strategies such as the alleviation of poverty, creation of jobs/employment, proper orientation and reduction of illiteracy which have been identified as risk factors of insecurity (Adetoro, 2012). Also, immediate short-term security strategies aimed at either maintaining an existing security situation or at curbing those activities that lead to insecurity and loss of life, such as insurgency, kidnapping, armed robbery, militancy as the case seems to appear in Nigeria are also adopted.
In most cases, weapon scanners, detectors and other security gadgets have been procured and used as short term security strategies at airports, seaports, land borders, government and private institutions, offices, banks, hotels, parks and checkpoints by both trained and untrained personnel. Individuals have gone ahead to provide their own personal security at home and offices, and this have led to the increase in private security firms, and most unfortunately, to the proliferation of illegal arms and weapons in the Nigerian society (Olaniyan, 2015; Amnesty International, AI, 2014; United Nations Security Council, UNSC, 2012). However, all these efforts by different persons and organizations at providing adequate security for themselves, their groups or citizens, underscore the importance of security for humans to function at their optimal capacity, as well as safeguarding lives and properties. The decisions to adopt any of the afore-mentioned security strategies (often referred to as security strategy decision) is crucial owing to the scarcity of resources needed to meet human needs (World Health Organization (WHO), 2001), and people must make adequate plans to ensure proper utilization of resources in order to avoid waste. Adebakin, (2012), defined security strategy decision as the choice or choosing between the alternatives/options of using scanners, detectors or devices to search for illegal arms and ammunitions in the hands of unauthorized individuals and persons, by the state/security agencies, or to embark on massive provision of jobs for the youths to distract them from engaging in activities that undermine state security. It also refers to the different tactics adopted by the state security agencies such as the Army, Navy, Police and the Department for Security Services (DSS) to maintain adequate peace and secure lives and properties of the citizens of Nigeria. The current study is anchored on the definition of security strategy decision as the choice to use scanners and detectors at the various borders and checkpoints to checkmate the movement of illegal arms/weapons across Nigeria.
