Arms, bending discounting functions:how motor actions affect intertemporal decision-making

We demonstrate that task-irrelevant somatic activity influences intertemporal decision making: Arm movements associated with approach (arm flexion), rather than avoidance (arm extension), instigate present-biased preferences. The effect is moderated by the sensitivity of the general reward system and, owing to learning principles, restricted to arm positions of the dominant hand.

A method for systematic artifact selection decision making

Artifact selection decisions typically involve the selection of one from a number of possible/candidate options (decision alternatives). In order to support such decisions, it is important to identify and recognize relevant key issues of problem solving and decision making (Albers, 1996; Harris, 1998a, 1998b; Jacobs & Holten, 1995; Loch & Conger, 1996; Rumble, 1991; Sauter, 1999; Simon, 1986). Sauter classifies four problem solving/decision making styles: (1) left-brain style, (2) right-brain style, (3) accommodating, and (4) integrated (Sauter, 1999). The left-brain style employs analytical and quantitative techniques and relies on rational and logical reasoning. In an effort to achieve predictability and minimize uncertainty, problems are explicitly defined, solution methods are determined, orderly information searches are conducted, and analysis is increasingly refined. Left-brain style decision making works best when it is possible to predict/control, measure, and quantify all relevant variables, and when information is complete. In direct contrast, right-brain style decision making is based on intuitive techniques—it places more emphasis on feelings than facts. Accommodating decision makers use their non-dominant style when they realize that it will work best in a given situation. Lastly, integrated style decision makers are able to combine the left- and right-brain styles—they use analytical processes to filter information and intuition to contend with uncertainty and complexity.

Dynamic decision networks for decision-making in self-adaptive systems:a case study

Bayesian decision theory is increasingly applied to support decision-making processes under environmental variability and uncertainty. Researchers from application areas like psychology and biomedicine have applied these techniques successfully. However, in the area of software engineering and speci?cally in the area of self-adaptive systems (SASs), little progress has been made in the application of Bayesian decision theory. We believe that techniques based on Bayesian Networks (BNs) are useful for systems that dynamically adapt themselves at runtime to a changing environment, which is usually uncertain. In this paper, we discuss the case for the use of BNs, speci?cally Dynamic Decision Networks (DDNs), to support the decision-making of self-adaptive systems. We present how such a probabilistic model can be used to support the decision making in SASs and justify its applicability. We have applied our DDN-based approach to the case of an adaptive remote data mirroring system. We discuss results, implications and potential bene?ts of the DDN to enhance the development and operation of self-adaptive systems, by providing mechanisms to cope with uncertainty and automatically make the best decision.

Increased salience of gains versus decreased associative learning differentiate bipolar disorder from schizophrenia during incentive decision making

Background Abnormalities in incentive decision making, typically assessed using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), have been reported in both schizophrenia (SZ) and bipolar disorder (BD). We applied the Expectancy-Valence (E-V) model to determine whether motivational, cognitive and response selection component processes of IGT performance are differentially affected in SZ and BD. Method Performance on the IGT was assessed in 280 individuals comprising 70 remitted patients with SZ, 70 remitted patients with BD and 140 age-, sex-and IQ-matched healthy individuals. Based on the E-V model, we extracted three parameters, 'attention to gains or loses', 'expectancy learning' and 'response consistency', that respectively reflect motivational, cognitive and response selection influences on IGT performance. Results Both patient groups underperformed in the IGT compared to healthy individuals. However, the source of these deficits was diagnosis specific. Associative learning underlying the representation of expectancies was disrupted in SZ whereas BD was associated with increased incentive salience of gains. These findings were not attributable to non-specific effects of sex, IQ, psychopathology or medication. Conclusions Our results point to dissociable processes underlying abnormal incentive decision making in BD and SZ that could potentially be mapped to different neural circuits. © 2012 Cambridge University Press.

Fuzzy assessment of performance of a decision making units using DEA:a non-radical approach

Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is recognized as a modern approach to the assessment of performance of a set of homogeneous Decision Making Units (DMUs) that use similar sources to produce similar outputs. While DEA commonly is used with precise data, recently several approaches are introduced for evaluating DMUs with uncertain data. In the existing approaches many information on uncertainties are lost. For example in the defuzzification, the a-level and fuzzy ranking approaches are not considered. In the tolerance approach the inequality or equality signs are fuzzified but the fuzzy coefficients (inputs and outputs) are not treated directly. The purpose of this paper is to develop a new model to evaluate DMUs under uncertainty using Fuzzy DEA and to include a-level to the model under fuzzy environment. An example is given to illustrate this method in details.

A critique of a model for an academic staff activity database developed to aid a department in strategic and operational decision making

This paper discusses the use of a Model developed by Aston Business School to record the work load of its academic staff. By developing a database to register annual activity in all areas of teaching, administration and research the School has created a flexible tool which can be used for facilitating both day-to-day managerial and longer term strategic decisions. This paper gives a brief outline of the Model and discusses the factors which were taken into account when setting it up. Particular attention is paid to the uses made of the Model and the problems encountered in developing it. The paper concludes with an appraisal of the Model’s impact and of additional developments which are currently being considered. Aston Business School has had a Load Model in some form for many years. The Model has, however, been refined over the past five years, so that it has developed into a form which can be used for a far greater number of purposes within the School. The Model is coordinated by a small group of academic and administrative staff, chaired by the Head of the School. This group is responsible for the annual cycle of collecting and inputting data, validating returns, carrying out analyses of the raw data, and presenting the mater ial to different sections of the School. The authors of this paper are members of this steer ing group.

Computer based approaches to managerial decision making:optimism, heuristics and simulation

DUE TO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES WITH PRIOR ARRANGEMENT

A method for systematic artifact selection decision making

Artifact selection decisions typically involve the selection of one from a number of possible/candidate options (decision alternatives). In order to support such decisions, it is important to identify and recognize relevant key issues of problem solving and decision making (Albers, 1996; Harris, 1998a, 1998b; Jacobs & Holten, 1995; Loch & Conger, 1996; Rumble, 1991; Sauter, 1999; Simon, 1986). Sauter classifies four problem solving/decision making styles: (1) left-brain style, (2) right-brain style, (3) accommodating, and (4) integrated (Sauter, 1999). The left-brain style employs analytical and quantitative techniques and relies on rational and logical reasoning. In an effort to achieve predictability and minimize uncertainty, problems are explicitly defined, solution methods are determined, orderly information searches are conducted, and analysis is increasingly refined. Left-brain style decision making works best when it is possible to predict/control, measure, and quantify all relevant variables, and when information is complete. In direct contrast, right-brain style decision making is based on intuitive techniques—it places more emphasis on feelings than facts. Accommodating decision makers use their non-dominant style when they realize that it will work best in a given situation. Lastly, integrated style decision makers are able to combine the left- and right-brain styles—they use analytical processes to filter information and intuition to contend with uncertainty and complexity.

Price policy and price decision making in small companies

DUE TO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES WITH PRIOR ARRANGEMENT

A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems

Bioenergy schemes are multi-faceted and complex by nature, with many available raw material supplies and technical options and a diverse set of stakeholders holding a raft of conflicting opinions. To develop and operate a successful scheme there are many requirements that should be considered and satisfied. This paper provides a review of those academic works attempting to deal with problems arising within the bioenergy sector using multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. These methods are particularly suitable to bioenergy given its multi-faceted nature but could be equally relevant to other energy conversion technologies. Related articles appearing in the international journals from 2000 to 2010 are gathered and analysed so that the following two questions can be answered. (i) Which methods are the most popular? (ii) Which problems attract the most attention? The review finds that optimisation methods are most popular with methods choosing between few alternatives being used in 44% of reviewed papers and methods choosing between many alternatives being used in 28%. The most popular application area was to technology selection with 27% of reviewed papers followed by policy decisions with 18%. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.

Classifying clinical decision making:a unifying approach

This is the first of two linked papers exploring decision making in nursing which integrate research evidence from different clinical and academic disciplines. Currently there are many decision-making theories, each with their own distinctive concepts and terminology, and there is a tendency for separate disciplines to view their own decision-making processes as unique. Identifying good nursing decisions and where improvements can be made is therefore problematic, and this can undermine clinical and organizational effectiveness, as well as nurses' professional status. Within the unifying framework of psychological classification, the overall aim of the two papers is to clarify and compare terms, concepts and processes identified in a diversity of decision-making theories, and to demonstrate their underlying similarities. It is argued that the range of explanations used across disciplines can usefully be re-conceptualized as classification behaviour. This paper explores problems arising from multiple theories of decision making being applied to separate clinical disciplines. Attention is given to detrimental effects on nursing practice within the context of multidisciplinary health-care organizations and the changing role of nurses. The different theories are outlined and difficulties in applying them to nursing decisions highlighted. An alternative approach based on a general model of classification is then presented in detail to introduce its terminology and the unifying framework for interpreting all types of decisions. The classification model is used to provide the context for relating alternative philosophical approaches and to define decision-making activities common to all clinical domains. This may benefit nurses by improving multidisciplinary collaboration and weakening clinical elitism.

Classifying clinical decision making:interpreting nursing intuition, heuristics and medical diagnosis

This is the second of two linked papers exploring decision making in nursing. The first paper, 'Classifying clinical decision making: a unifying approach' investigated difficulties with applying a range of decision-making theories to nursing practice. This is due to the diversity of terminology and theoretical concepts used, which militate against nurses being able to compare the outcomes of decisions analysed within different frameworks. It is therefore problematic for nurses to assess how good their decisions are, and where improvements can be made. However, despite the range of nomenclature, it was argued that there are underlying similarities between all theories of decision processes and that these should be exposed through integration within a single explanatory framework. A proposed solution was to use a general model of psychological classification to clarify and compare terms, concepts and processes identified across the different theories. The unifying framework of classification was described and this paper operationalizes it to demonstrate how different approaches to clinical decision making can be re-interpreted as classification behaviour. Particular attention is focused on classification in nursing, and on re-evaluating heuristic reasoning, which has been particularly prone to theoretical and terminological confusion. Demonstrating similarities in how different disciplines make decisions should promote improved multidisciplinary collaboration and a weakening of clinical elitism, thereby enhancing organizational effectiveness in health care and nurses' professional status. This is particularly important as nurses' roles continue to expand to embrace elements of managerial, medical and therapeutic work. Analysing nurses' decisions as classification behaviour will also enhance clinical effectiveness, and assist in making nurses' expertise more visible. In addition, the classification framework explodes the myth that intuition, traditionally associated with nurses' decision making, is less rational and scientific than other approaches.