Influence of Publications in the Mass Media for Decision-Making by Representatives of Russian Business Community

Download paper
Emma B. Terchenko

Senior Public Relations Specialist at Deloitte, Moscow, Russia


Section: Sociology of Journalism

The article is concerned with the characteristics of decision-making by representatives of Russian business on the basis of the media, such as the choice of publications, the frequency of decision-making under the influence of the media, the nature and level of these decisions. The author conducted her study by interviewing 110 employees of the Russian financial sector. The survey took place in the summer of 2019 in Moscow. The main conclusion drawn in the article is that the Russian business community is quite active in making decisions based on the media, but for the most part these are one-time decisions, which do not have a significant impact on business. In addition, media based decision-making activity is uneven and depends on the function of the employee. The media is more likely to fulfill the role of confirming the existing ideas of businessmen and the data they received earlier. Objectivity, according to the survey, has become the main quality of the media, on whose basis business is ready to make decisions. For most businessmen, it is important which source the journalist uses – official or anonymous. In addition, despite a rather high level of trust in the media among many businessmen, a significant part of them recognize that over the past 5–7 years they have no longer trusted the media the way they did. Such a decline indicates a possible risk to the reputation of the media in the eyes of Russian business.

Keywords: decision-making, media, business
DOI: 10.30547/vestnik.journ.3.2020.328


Allais M. (1953) Le Comportement de l’Homme Rationnel devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de l’Ecole Americaine [Rational Behavior of Man under Risk. Criticism of the Postulates and Axioms of the American School]. Econometrica 21 (4): 503–546. (In French)

Barron G., Erev I. (2003) Small Feedback-Based Decisions and Their Limited Correspondence to Description-Based Decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 16: 215–233. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.443

Bennett L. (1981) Perception and Cognition: an Information-Processing Framework for Politics. In S. Long (ed.) The Handbook of Political Behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

Blavatskyy P. (2005) Back to the St. Petersburg Paradox? Management Science 51: 677–678.

Busemeyer J., Townsend J. (1993) Decision Field Theory: a Dynamic-Cognitive Approach to Decision Making in an Uncertain Environment. Psychological Review 100: 432–459. DOI:

De Bondt W., Thaler R. (1985) Does the Stock Market Overreact? The Journal of Finance 40: 793–805. DOI: 10.2307/2327804

December J. (1996) Units of Analysis for Internet Communication. Journal of Communication 46 (1): 14–38. DOI:

Entman R. (1989) Democracy Without Citizens: Media and the Decay of American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI:

Entman R. (2007) Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power. Journal of Communication 57: 163–173. DOI:

Erev I., Ert E., Roth A. (2010) A Choice Prediction Competition for Market Entry Games: an Introduction. Games 1 (2): 2–10. DOI: 10.3390/g1020117

Erev I., Ert E., Plonsky O., Cohen D. et al. (2017) From Anomalies to Forecasts: Toward a Descriptive Model of Decisions under Risk, under Ambiguity, and from Experience. Psychological Review 124 (4): 369–409. DOI: 10.1037/rev0000062.

Erev I., Roth A. (2014) Maximization, Learning, and Economic Behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (3): 45–60. DOI:

Ert E., Erev I. (2013) On the Descriptive Value of Loss Aversion in Decisions under Risk: Six Clarifications. Judgment and Decision Making 8: 214–235.

Etzioni A. (2014) Humble Decision-Making Theory. Public Management Review 16 (5): 611–619. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2013.875392

Festinger L. (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Fox C., Tversky A. (1998) A Belief-Based Account of Decision under Uncertainty. Management Science 44: 879–895. DOI:

Gigerenzer G. (1998) Ecological Intelligence: an Adaptation for Frequencies. In D. Cummins, C. Allen (eds.) The Evolution of Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 9–29.

Goodwin P., Wright G. (2004) Decision Analysis for Management Judgment. Chichester: Wiley.

Gross K., D’Ambrosio L. (2004) Framing Emotional Response. Political Psychology 25: 1–29. DOI:

Hertwig R., Barron G., Weber E., Erev I. (2004). Decisions from Experience and the Effect of Rare Events in Risky Choice. Psychological Science 15: 534–539. DOI:

Katsenelenboigen A. (1992) Indeterministic Economics. New York: Praeger Publ.

Kurz-Milcke E., Gigerenzer G. (2007) Heuristic Decision Making. Marketing: Journal of Research and Management 3 (1): 48–56.

Lau R., Erber R. (1985) An Information Processing Approach to Political Sophistication. In S. Kraus, R. Perloff (eds.) Mass Media and Political Thought. Beverly Hills: Sage. Pp. 25–43. DOI: 10.2307/2131346

MacKuen M. (1984) Exposure to Information, Belief Integration, and Individual Responsiveness to Agenda Change. American Political Science Review 78: 372–391. DOI:

McCombs M., Shaw D. (1972) The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. The Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (2): 176–187. DOI: 10.1086/267990

McGuire W. (1985) Attitudes and Attitude Change. The Handbook of Social Psychology 2: 135–200.

Mcneil B., Pauker S., Sox H., Tversky A. (1982) On the Elicitation of Preference for Alternative Therapies. The New England Journal of Medicine 306: 1259–1262. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198205273062103

McQuail D. (1985) Sociology of Mass Communication. Annual Review of Sociology 11: 93–111. DOI:

Merlhiot G. (2018) Managing Decision-Making with Certainty of Threat. Journal of Risk Research 12: 17–23. DOI:

Mongin P. (2019) The Allais Paradox: What It Became, What It Really Was, What It Now Suggests to Us. Economics and Philosophy 1: 1–37. DOI: 10.1017/S0266267118000469

Neuman R. (1986) The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate. Harvard University Press.

Payne J. (1976) Heuristic Search Processes in Decision Making. Advances in Consumer Research 3: 321–327.

Payne J. (2005) It Is Whether You Win or Lose: the Importance of the Overall Probabilities of Winning or Losing in Risky Choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 30: 5–19. DOI:

Rieger M., Wang M. (2006) Cumulative Prospect Theory and the St. Petersburg Paradox. Economic Theory 28: 665–679. DOI:

Simon H. (1955) A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69 (1): 99–118. DOI:

Simon H. (1956) Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment. Psychological Review 63 (2): 129–138.

Thaler R., Tversky A., Kahneman D., Schwartz A. (1997) The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: an Experimental Test. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112: 647–661. DOI:

Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1974) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185: 1124–1131. DOI: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1981) The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science 211: 453–458. DOI: 10.1126/science.7455683

Tversky A., Bar-Hillel M. (1983) Risk: The Long and the Short. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 9: 713–717. DOI:

Tversky A., Fox C. (1995) Weighing Risk and Uncertainty. Psychological Review 102: 269–283. DOI:

Venkatraman V., Payne J., Huettel S. (2014) An Overall Probability of Winning Heuristic for Complex Risky Decisions: Choice and Eye Fixation Evidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 125 (2): 73–87. DOI:

Wakker P. (2010) Prospect Theory: for Risk and Ambiguity. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI:

Weber M., Zuchel H. (2005) How Do Prior Outcomes Affect Risk Attitude? Comparing Escalation of Commitment and the House-Money Effect. Decision Analysis 2: 30–43. DOI: