scholarly journals COMPARING CARCASS END-POINT AND PROFIT MAXIMIZATION DECISION RULES USING DYNAMIC NONLINEAR GROWTH FUNCTIONS

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOSHUA G. MAPLES ◽  
KALYN T. COATNEY ◽  
JOHN M. RILEY ◽  
BRANDI B. KARISCH ◽  
JANE A. PARISH ◽  
...  

AbstractThis article develops a market timing decision rule for cattle feeders based on profit maximization. We then compare it with the “status quo” strategy of feeding cattle to a targeted carcass end point. We estimate individual nonlinear dynamic growth functions to derive each animal's value of the marginal product in relation to days on feed. Given individual marginal factor costs, our results indicate that the use of a profit maximization rule could have increased average profits by $16.56 to $21.09 per head for the cattle of known age, and $7.67 to $11.32 per head if age was unknown.

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-285
Author(s):  
JOSHUA G. MAPLES ◽  
KALYN T. COATNEY ◽  
JOHN M. RILEY ◽  
BRANDI B. KARISCH ◽  
JANE A. PARISH ◽  
...  

In the Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics Volume 47 (Number 1), Equations 7 and 10 were published with errors.


1994 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Baron

AbstractAccording to a simple form of consequentialism, we should base decisions on our judgments about their consequences for achieving our goals. Our goals give us reason to endorse consequentialism as a standard of decision making. Alternative standards invariably lead to consequences that are less good in this sense. Yet some people knowingly follow decision rules that violate consequentialism. For example, they prefer harmful omissions to less harmful acts, they favor the status quo over alternatives they would otherwise judge to be belter, they provide third-party compensation on the basis of the cause of an injury rather than the benefit from the compensation, they ignore deterrent effects in decisions about punishment, and they resist coercive reforms they judge to be beneficial. I suggest that nonconsequentialist principles arise from overgeneralizing rules that are consistent with consequentialism in a limited set of cases. Commitment to such rules is detached from their original purposes. The existence of such nonconsequentialist decision biases has implications for philosophical and experimental methodology, the relation between psychology and public policy, and education.


2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amber L. Garcia ◽  
Michael T. Schmitt ◽  
Naomi Ellemers ◽  
Nyla R. Branscombe
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document