Analogy in Decision-Making

In the context of decision making under uncertainty, we formalize the concept of analogy: an analogy between two decision problems is a mapping that transforms one problem into the other while preserving the problem's structure. We identify the basic structure of a decision problem, and provide a representation of the mappings that pre- serve this structure. We then consider decision makers who use multiple analogies. Our main results are a representation theorem for "aggregators" of analogies satisfying certain minimal requirements, and the identification of preferences emerging from analogical reasoning. We show that a large variety of multiple-prior preferences can be thought of as emerging from analogical reasoning.

Understanding economic decision-making under social norms prescribing behaviours

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

Evidence-Based Practice in PubMed: Are Shared Filters Useful to Health Sciences Academic Users?

Objectives In April 2010, the Université de Montréal’s Health Sciences Library has implemented shared filters in its institutional PubMed account. Most of these filters are designed to highlight resources for evidence-based practice, such as Clinical Queries, Systematic Reviews and Evidence-based Synopsis. We now want to measure how those filters are perceived and used by our users. Methods For one month, data was gathered through an online questionnaire proposed to users of Université de Montréal’s PubMed account. A print version was also distributed to participants in information literacy workshops given by the health sciences librarians. Respondents were restricted to users affiliated to Université de Montréal’s faculties of Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Sciences, Nursing and Pharmacy. Basic user information such as year/program of study or department affiliation was also collected. The questionnaire allowed users to identify the filters they use, assess the relevance of filters, and also suggest new ones. Results Survey results showed that the shared filters of Université de Montreal’s PubMed account were found useful by the majority of respondents. Filters allowing rapid access to secondary resources ranked among the most relevant (Reviews, Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Practice Guidelines and Clinical Evidence). For Clinical Study Queries, Randomized Controlled Trial (Therapy/Narrow) was considered the most useful. Some new shared filters have been suggested by respondents. Finally, 18% of the respondents indicated that they did not quite understand the relevance of filters. Conclusion Based on the survey results, shared filters considered most useful will be kept, some will be enhanced and others removed so that suggested ones could be added. The fact that some respondents did not understand well the relevance of filters could potentially be addressed through our PubMed workshops, online library guides or by renaming some filters in a more meaningful way.

Disease, Disparities and Decision Making: Mandatory HIV Testing of Prospective Immigrants to Canada

Étude de cas / Case study

A theoretical and experimental dissociation of two models of decision‐making

La prise de décision est un processus computationnel fondamental dans de nombreux aspects du comportement animal. Le modèle le plus souvent rencontré dans les études portant sur la prise de décision est appelé modèle de diffusion. Depuis longtemps, il explique une grande variété de données comportementales et neurophysiologiques dans ce domaine. Cependant, un autre modèle, le modèle d’urgence, explique tout aussi bien ces mêmes données et ce de façon parcimonieuse et davantage encrée sur la théorie. Dans ce travail, nous aborderons tout d’abord les origines et le développement du modèle de diffusion et nous verrons comment il a été établi en tant que cadre de travail pour l’interprétation de la plupart des données expérimentales liées à la prise de décision. Ce faisant, nous relèveront ses points forts afin de le comparer ensuite de manière objective et rigoureuse à des modèles alternatifs. Nous réexaminerons un nombre d’assomptions implicites et explicites faites par ce modèle et nous mettrons alors l’accent sur certains de ses défauts. Cette analyse servira de cadre à notre introduction et notre discussion du modèle d’urgence. Enfin, nous présenterons une expérience dont la méthodologie permet de dissocier les deux modèles, et dont les résultats illustrent les limites empiriques et théoriques du modèle de diffusion et démontrent en revanche clairement la validité du modèle d'urgence. Nous terminerons en discutant l'apport potentiel du modèle d'urgence pour l'étude de certaines pathologies cérébrales, en mettant l'accent sur de nouvelles perspectives de recherche.

Favoriser le développement du rôle des infirmières chefs afin d'accroître les pratiques basées sur des résultats probants en centre hospitalier

Travail dirigé présenté à la Faculté des sciences infirmières en vue de l'obtention du grade de maître ès Sciences (M.Sc.)

Agendas in legislative decision-making

Despite the wide range of agendas used in legislative decision-making, the literature has focused almost exclusively on two stylized formats, the so-called Euro-Latin and Anglo-American agendas. As emphasized by Ordeshook and Schwartz [1987], this focus leaves a sizable gap in our understanding of the legislative process. To help address the deficiency, I first define a very broad class of agendas (called simple agendas) whose features are common among agendas used in legislative settings. I then characterize the sophisticated (Farquharson [1969]) voting outcomes implemented by agendas in this class. By establishing a clear connection between the structure of simple agendas and the outcomes associated with them, the characterization extends our understanding of legislative decision-making well beyond the very limited scope of Euro-Latin and Anglo-American agendas.

Searching for consensus in ahp-group decision making. A bayesian perspective

This paper sets out to identify the initial positions of the different decision makers who intervene in a group decision making process with a reduced number of actors, and to establish possible consensus paths between these actors. As a methodological support, it employs one of the most widely-known multicriteria decision techniques, namely, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Assuming that the judgements elicited by the decision makers follow the so-called multiplicative model (Crawford and Williams, 1985; Altuzarra et al., 1997; Laininen and Hämäläinen, 2003) with log-normal errors and unknown variance, a Bayesian approach is used in the estimation of the relative priorities of the alternatives being compared. These priorities, estimated by way of the median of the posterior distribution and normalised in a distributive manner (priorities add up to one), are a clear example of compositional data that will be used in the search for consensus between the actors involved in the resolution of the problem through the use of Multidimensional Scaling tools

Group preference structures in AHP–group decision making

This paper presents a procedure that allows us to determine the preference structures (PS) associated to each of the different groups of actors that can be identified in a group decision making problem with a large number of individuals. To that end, it makes use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Saaty, 1980) as the technique to solve discrete multicriteria decision making problems. This technique permits the resolution of multicriteria, multienvironment and multiactor problems in which subjective aspects and uncertainty have been incorporated into the model, constructing ratio scales corresponding to the priorities relative to the elements being compared, normalised in a distributive manner (wi = 1). On the basis of the individuals’ priorities we identify different clusters for the decision makers and, for each of these, the associated preference structure using, to that end, tools analogous to those of Multidimensional Scaling. The resulting PS will be employed to extract knowledge for the subsequent negotiation processes and, should it be necessary, to determine the relative importance of the alternatives being compared using anyone of the existing procedures

Is counter-terrorism policy evidence-based? : what works, what harms, and what is unknown. '??Est?? basada la pol??tica antiterrorista en la evidencia? : lo que es efectivo, lo que es perjudicial, y lo desconocido'

Resumen tomado de la publicaci??n

Behind the decision making of the KFC coffee campaign, can KFC win the coffee market in UK?�

KFC, the chain fast-food restaurants in UK, planed to launched coffee products through campaigns. There are two main reasons for KFC to make the decision. The first one is KFC tried to promote its coffee products with KFC A.M. breakfast plan and it failed at last. The second reason is that KFC needs extension points of interest. The financial condition of KFC has been steady but no breakthrough growth. It has been showed that there is enormous potential of “fast-drink” market in UK. After the success of KFC “Krushems” series, it is reasonable for the company launched coffee products. However, KFC also faced to many challenges to win the market. Compare to the main competitor of McDonald’s, KFC’s quantity of restaurants is far too less. Moreover, KFC has a brand limitation that focuses more family than single urban. The dominant competitors are another challenge KFC need to manage. To sum up, KFC has to win these challenges to be a bigger player in UK coffee market.

Alps Workshop 3 p19 Steps in decision-making

Stepped Animation

Research for Evidence Based Practice

Online animation resources