UNCERTAINTY TOLERANCE IN THE PROCESS OF COMMANDER’S DECISION-MAKING

Address for correspondence, e-mail: editpsychas@gmail.com Copyright: © Oleg Hmilar, Sergiy Cherevychnyi This is an Open Access journal, all articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license. ABSTRACT The uncertainty tolerance is an example of a phenomenon, the value of which is increasing in all spheres of modern life. In the article, uncertainty tolerance is interpreted through the prism of the concept of authoritarian individuality, dispositional models and algorithms for managerial decision-making. Semantically, uncertainty tolerance and intolerance are decoded by the authors as a personality trait, socio-psychological setting, cognitive-perceptual formation, and as a potential source of threat.

Therefore, the purpose of the article is to recognise the problem of the commander's decision-making process, to determine the level of tolerance for uncertainty, to identify the components of uncertainty that have a significant impact on the commander's decision-making process, and to define main behavioural strategies to reduce the impact of uncertainty on the decision-making.

The analysis of the recent research and
publications. The notion of tolerance of uncertainty has been analysed by means of different approaches. The first is represented by the concept of authoritarian individuality. In 1948-1949, E. Frankel-Brunswick introduced the concept of "tolerance for ambiguity", that refers to a two-digit, dynamically changing and contradictory situation. The content of the concept of tolerance for uncertainty is seen as the opposite of the concept of uncertainty intolerance, which characterises the individuality of the authoritarian type. Intolerance was defined by the scientist as a tendency to make decisions on the principle of "black and white", i.e.quickly proceeding to clarity, without taking into account any complex realities, and rejecting the needs of other people. The psychological nature of uncertainty tolerance reveals the phenomenon of attitudes associated with interpersonal tolerance, impartiality, objectivity of judgments and judgments, cognitive and behavioural flexibility (Frenkel-Brunswik, 1948).
The second approach to the study of the tolerance for uncertainty is presented by the dispositional models, the source of which is the S. Badner's concept of perception.
This approach preserves the continuity of the psychology of individuality, but represents an understanding of uncertainty tolerance as a stable personal characteristic, which allows to describe and predict the behaviour of a person in a situation of uncertainty. Tolerance for uncertainty is viewed as a personal continuum, a pole of the scale, opposite to the uncertainty intolerance, reflecting cognitive, emotional and behavioural responses. This approach has also defined the concept of "uncertainty", which meant unspecified stimuli and situations, combined with the parameters of novelty, complexity, non-solvability (Badner, 1962).
The third approach appeals to decision-making models and shifts the focus of the attention from the sphere of individuality to the sphere of interaction between personality and situation. Uncertainty tolerance is seen as a choice among several alternatives combined with uncertainty and risk. The concepts of "objective uncertainty" and "subjective uncertainty" have resulted in the consideration of the phenomenon in the context of subject-activity methodology, which focuses not just on the parameters of external stimulation, but also on its mental representation. The self-presentation is a source of transformation of the situation, which collectively determines the direction of the mental activity.
Psychologists are studyingthe phenomenon of tolerance foruncertainty and uncertainty intolerance on the basis of different conceptual approaches. For example, tolerance for uncertainty is seen as a personality trait. F. The future is perceived as a source of discomfort and potential dangers that cause feelings of fear, anxiety and uncertainty. The perception of life is generally defined as black and white, one-dimensional. They are not ready to accept reality in all its ambiguity and complexity; they tend to deny that it does not fit into a rigidly set model. They need a template, a ready-made algorithm for solving a particular problem. Each decision is usually perceived as a turning point, after which it will be difficult to return and make the "second move". The value of the decision is often overestimated, which as a result complicates the decisionmaking process. In communication with others they constantly strive to achieve maximum clarity, accuracy and unambiguity. There arises a need to know as much as possible information about others, sometimes rejecting their right to personal space. This leads to difficulties in respecting the boundaries in relationships. An uncertainty tolerance is one of the key components in the system of personal choice and decision making in an uncertain environment. For instance, uncertainty tolerance is seen as the ability of the individual to act productively in the face of uncertainty and to solve tasks characterised by a significant degree of uncertainty (Kornylova T. V. & other, 2010).

The Method
In order to define the uncertainty tolerance level of the officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine during the decision-making process, we conducted a test using S.
Badner's technique "Uncertainty Tolerance" (adapted by G. According to the obtained results, it was found out that the novelty factor negatively affects 1% of the respondents (high level of intolerance), has a low effect on 14% of the respondents (low level of intolerance), and 80% of the respondents has an average result. This, in turn, may indicate that the novelty of the problem does not create significant difficulties for the commander's decisionmaking process. In fact, it mainly influences the emotions of the individual, which the surveyed officers control properly.
On the contrary, the complexity factor was inversely proportional, which adversely affects the officer's tolerance. Thus, for 28% this factor is crucial and for the remaining 72% it also plays a significant role (they have an average level of intolerance). Noone of the surveyed mentioned that this factor did not affect him. This situation indicates the difficulties associated with cognitive processes in solving complex problems in the uncertainty situation and making quick, correct decisions by commanders.
A similar situation was noted concerning the factor of non-solvability of the problem. Only 6% of the surveyed commanders are not significantly influenced by this factor.
For the remaining 94% of the respondents, this factor plays a significant role (80% of respondents have a medium level of intolerance and 14% have a high level of intolerance).
These indicators prove the complexity of the uncertainty situation that is associated with cognitive processes, which are transmitted into the behavioural plane and become the factor of non-solvability. It becomes too difficult for commanders to make decisions in such situations and will Table 1 The There are two strategies that can be applied in situations of uncertainty: Our world is often viewed as very uncertain nowadays. It is difficult to predict what will happen in a month, in a few years. If we mentally built a scenario of our lives, we have no guarantee that we will be able to put it into practice. In these circumstances, one way to maintain internal balance is to create and maintain certainty on your own. To accomplish this, an individual can rely on rules, norms, algorithms that he has developed, or those that are offered by the society. The person maintains certainty and continues to move in the presupposed direction in spite of any circumstances. In this case, the methods of achieving goals can be repeatedly adjusted. A person is"an island of stability" in the stormy ocean of the outside world. It is important to be able to separate the uncertainty of the outside world from the own internal state. However, not every individual is capable of creating this inner certainty and stability. The lack of this ability leads to the intolerance for the external uncertainty.
In his work, "Men's Search for Meaning", Victor it made sense to endure the suffering. Victor Frankl's memoirs tell us that he found a way out of the cruelty around him by creating certainty within himself. He had no idea, whether he would ever live outside the concentration camp. However, he imagined that future, drawing it in his imagination, thus giving his life certainty and meaning (Frankl, 1990).
If the situation of the certainty self-creation is