Weighting on waiting: Willpower and attribute weighting models of decision making

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Harris
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Attribute Weighting ◽  
Strategic Allocation

Abstract Willpower is often conceptualized as incorporating effortful and momentary suppression of immediate but ultimately inferior rewards. Yet, growing evidence instead supports a process of attribute weighting, whereby normatively optimal choices arise from separable evaluation of different attributes (e.g., time and money). Strategic allocation of attention settles conflicts between competing choice-relevant attributes, which could be expanded to include self-referential predictions (“resolve”).

Extending ARAS with Integration of Objective Attribute Weighting under Spherical Fuzzy Environment

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Sait Gül
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Owa Operator ◽  
Attribute Weighting ◽  
Preference Domain ◽  
Attribute Weights ◽  
Fuzzy Environment ◽  
Multiple Attribute ◽  
Collection Time

Various fuzzy sets have been developed in the recent years to model the uncertainty in judgments. Spherical fuzzy set (SFS) concept is one of these developments. It can provide an extensive preference domain for decision-makers by allowing them to state their hesitancy more explicitly. The peculiarity of SFS is that the squared sum of membership, nonmembership, and hesitancy degrees should be between 0 and 1 while each is independently defined in [0, 1]. In this study, ARAS as one of the most applied multiple attribute decision-making approaches is extended into a spherical fuzzy environment. Entropy-based and OWA operator-based objective attribute weights are also integrated with the newly proposed spherical fuzzy ARAS for coping with the drawbacks of subjective weighting such as longer data collection time and manipulation risk. The applicability of the proposition is shown in a hypothetical example of a product design problem and its robustness is shown by a comparative analysis.

Assessing International Allocation Strategies

1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bart Vos ◽  
Edwin van den Berg
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Operations Research ◽  
Business Strategy ◽  
Multinational Enterprises ◽  
Managerial Decision ◽  
Global Business ◽  
Specific Product ◽  
Mathematical Algorithms ◽  
Strategic Allocation ◽  
Allocation Strategies

Allocating the operations of multinational enterprises to geographic locations where performance can be optimized has become an important strategic issue. In view of the continuing growth of international trade and foreign direct investment, managers need systematic procedures to determine global allocation strategies. Available frameworks on global business strategy are typically abstract and generalized, making them less suited for the development of tailor‐made allocation strategies. Quantitative allocation models in operations research tend to be biased towards optimizing mathematical algorithms, making them less suited to support managerial decision making. This paper bridges the gap between generic strategy frameworks and highly quantitative operations research models by presenting a scanning tool to support decision making on strategic allocation issues. An important feature of this tool is to systematically filter available data, intended to quality and quantify critical product, process and market characteristics for specific product classes. The scanning tool has been applied in two cases, involving allocation decisions of a European multinational in the fast moving consumer goods industry.

Think, blink or sleep on it? The impact of modes of thought on complex decision making

2009 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 707-732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben R. Newell ◽  
Kwan Yao Wong ◽  
Jeremy C. H. Cheung ◽  
Tim Rakow
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Thought Processes ◽  
Unconscious Thought ◽  
Attribute Weighting ◽  
Final Experiment ◽  
Complex Decision Making ◽  
Complex Decision ◽  
Modes Of Thought ◽  
The Impact

This paper examines controversial claims about the merit of “unconscious thought” for making complex decisions. In four experiments, participants were presented with complex decisions and were asked to choose the best option immediately, after a period of conscious deliberation, or after a period of distraction (said to encourage “unconscious thought processes”). In all experiments the majority of participants chose the option predicted by their own subjective attribute weighting scores, regardless of the mode of thought employed. There was little evidence for the superiority of choices made “unconsciously”, but some evidence that conscious deliberation can lead to better choices. The final experiment suggested that the task is best conceptualized as one involving “online judgement” rather than one in which decisions are made after periods of deliberation or distraction. The results suggest that we should be cautious in accepting the advice to “stop thinking” about complex decisions.

Discarding optimality: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Reward Rate ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Standard Observer ◽  
Rate Maximization ◽  
Reward Rate Maximization ◽  
Descriptive Standard ◽  
Observer Model

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.

LPCD framework: Analytical tool or psychological model?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytical Tool ◽  
Mathematical Framework ◽  
Bayesian Decision ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Model ◽  
Psychological Reality ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Bayesian Decision Making

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.

Elaborating the role of reflection and individual differences in the study of folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Behavioral Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Economic Beliefs

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document