scholarly journals Optimal evidence accumulation on social networks

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhargav Karamched ◽  
Simon Stolarczyk ◽  
Zachary Kilpatrick ◽  
Kresimir Josić
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Information ◽  
Network Connectivity ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Accumulation ◽  
Forced Choice Task ◽  
Social Cliques ◽  
Accumulator Models

A fundamental question in biology is how organisms integrate sensory and social evidence to make decisions. However, few models describe how both these streams of information can be combined to optimize choices. Here we develop a normative model for collective decision making in a network of agents performing a two-alternative forced choice task. We assume that rational (Bayesian) agents in this network make private measurements, and observe the decisions of their neighbors until they accumulate sufficient evidence to make an irreversible choice. As each agent communicates its decision to those observing it, the flow of social information is described by a directed graph. The decision-making process in this setting is intuitive, but can be complex. We describe when and how the absence of a decision of a neighboring agent communicates social information, and how an agent must marginalize over all unobserved decisions. We also show how decision thresholds and network connectivity affect group evidence accumulation, and describe the dynamics of decision making in social cliques. Our model provides a bridge between the abstractions used in the economics literature and the evidence accumulator models used widely in neuroscience and psychology.

scholarly journals Collective decision making by rational individuals

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (44) ◽  
pp. E10387-E10396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard P. Mann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Social Information ◽  
Information Use ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Rational Decision ◽  
Rational Decision Making ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Social Information Use

The patterns and mechanisms of collective decision making in humans and animals have attracted both empirical and theoretical attention. Of particular interest has been the variety of social feedback rules and the extent to which these behavioral rules can be explained and predicted from theories of rational estimation and decision making. However, models that aim to model the full range of social information use have incorporated ad hoc departures from rational decision-making theory to explain the apparent stochasticity and variability of behavior. In this paper I develop a model of social information use and collective decision making by fully rational agents that reveals how a wide range of apparently stochastic social decision rules emerge from fundamental information asymmetries both between individuals and between the decision makers and the observer of those decisions. As well as showing that rational decision making is consistent with empirical observations of collective behavior, this model makes several testable predictions about how individuals make decisions in groups and offers a valuable perspective on how we view sources of variability in animal, and human, behavior.

scholarly journals Does trust influence the informal lending decision? An investigative analysis

2003 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ntiedo J. Umoren
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Protocol Analysis ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Initial Reaction ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Verbal Protocol ◽  
Verbal Protocol Analysis ◽  
Entrepreneurial Development ◽  
Lending Decision

This study analysed the role of trust in informal lending decision-making process. By applying verbal protocol analysis, this paper empirically examined the role of trust and cooperation in lender’s initial reaction to potential lending opportunities, and the lender’s assessment of the intermediary responsible for providing the initial referral of the lending opportunity. The results corroborate earlier findings, and provide sufficient evidence to confirm that about 93 per cent of lending opportunities presented to informal lenders are rejected. It also shows that considerable reliance is placed on the brokers presenting the opportunities. The result also indicates that the dearth of entrepreneurial development in Nigeria is tied implicitly to the instant trust and instant cooperation paradigm.

scholarly journals Evidence Accumulation Models: Current Limitations and Future Directions

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan J. Evans ◽  
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Response Time ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Choice Response ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Evidence Accumulation ◽  
Choice Response Time ◽  
Response Time Distributions

Evidence accumulation models (EAMs) have been the dominant models of speeded decision-making for several decades. These models propose that evidence accumulates for decision alternatives at some rate, until the evidence for one alternative reaches some threshold that triggers a decision. As a theory, EAMs have provided an accurate account of the choice response time distributions in a range of decision-making tasks, and as a measurement tool, EAMs have provided direct insight into how cognitive processes differ between groups and experimental conditions, resulting in EAMs becoming the standard paradigm of speeded decision-making. However, we argue that there are several limitations to how EAMs are currently tested and applied, which have begun to limit their value as a standard paradigm. Specifically, we believe that a theoretical plateau has been reached for the level of explanation that EAMs can provide about the decision-making process, and that applications of EAMs have started to become restrictive and of limited value. We provide several recommendations for how researchers can help to overcome these limitations. As a theory, we believe that EAMs can provide further value through being constrained by sources of data beyond the standard choice response time distributions, being extended to the entire decision-making process from encoding to responding, and having the random sources of variability replaced by systematic sources of variability. As a measurement tool, we believe that EAMs can provide further value through being a default method of inference for cognitive psychology in place of mean response time and choice, and being applied to a broader range of empirical questions that better capture individual differences in cognitive processes.

scholarly journals The Process The Formation of The Collective Leadership on The Corruption Eradication Commission

2021 ◽  
Vol 006 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Muslimin Muslimin ◽  
Yuli Andi Gani ◽  
Suryadi Suryadi ◽  
Choirul Saleh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Organizational Structure ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Collective Leadership ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Superior Level

This article was written based on the findings of research that examines the process of formation of collective leadership implemented by the Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi: KPK) in Indonesia during its inception in 2003 until the end of the leadership of Abraham Samad 2015. The results of the study indicate that the KPK's collective leadership was gradually formed through several stages can be identified in 3 development cycles. The first stage is a pioneering cycle that requires prerequisites for the formation of collective leadership in order to operate the leadership mechanism in the KPK's organizational structure. Second, the critical cycle, namely the operational trials of collective leadership that have the opportunity to succeed or fail. This cycle is characterized by collaboration between structures in the collective decision making process. Third, the operational stabilization cycle, is a stage of development that leads to the cohesiveness of KPK members and results in superior level of performance.

scholarly journals O Supremo Individual: mecanismos de atuação direta dos Ministros sobre o processo político / The Supreme Individuals: how Brazilian Supreme Court Justices can directly influence the political process

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diego Werneck Arguelhes ◽  
Leandro Molhano Ribeiro
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Institutional Analysis ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Judicial Politics ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Case Files

Resumo: Estudos e críticas à participação do Supremo Tribunal Federal na vida política nacional costumam assumir, ainda que implicitamente, que a decisão do tribunal a ser analisada ou criticada é obtida após um processo decisório interno colegiado. Mesmo que esse processo seja imperfeito, ele é visto como condição necessária para que os inputs individuais dos Ministros possam produzir efeitos relevantes sobre o mundo fora do tribunal. Neste trabalho, mostramos que os Ministros do STF podem agir individualmente, sem passar pelo colegiado, de modo a produzir efeitos sobre o comportamento de atores externos ao tribunal. Mapeamos conceitualmente esse tipo de poder individual, a partir de um marco teórico da análise institucional, para então identificar alguns exemplos na prática decisória do tribunal: a antecipação de posições na imprensa, o uso de pedidos de vista de longa duração e o uso de decisões monocráticas para avançar posições jurisprudenciais. Com base nesses três exemplos, apontamos e discutimos algumas implicações da existência desses poderes individuais para estudos sobre judicialização da política e comportamento judicial. Em especial, destacamos os problemas normativos que surgem quando se reconhece a possibilidade de que uma ação judicial internamente minoritária (isto é, uma ação que não expressa a preferência da maioria dos Ministros) produza resultados externamente contramajoritários.Palavras-chave: Supremo Tribunal Federal; Poderes Individuais; Comportamento Judicial; Processo Decisório; Análise Institucional.                                               Abstract: Existing studies on the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court tend to assume, even if implicitly, that decisions they analyze are the outcome of an internal, collective decision-making process. Even when this process is criticized as problematic in itself, it is seen as a necessary condition for the Justices’ individual preferences to have an actual impact in the outside world. In this paper, we show that the Justices have resources to act individually, bypassing the collective decision-making procedures, in ways that can and do influence the behavior of actors outside the Court. We conceptualize such individual powers within a framework of institutional analysis, and we identify a set of examples in the Court’s decision-making practices: using press statements to announce one’s judicial preferences, as they would be expressed in a future judicial opinion; individual requests to study the case files in order to prevent the Court from deciding it (pedidos de vista); and the strategic use of and reference to individual rulings (decisões monocráticas) to advance one’s individual jurisprudential views. These three examples allow us to discuss some of the implications of these individual powers for the literature on judicial politics. In particular, these powers are normatively problematic if they allow a position that is in the minority within the Court to create counter-majoritarian outcomes outside the Court.Keywords: Supreme Federal Court, Individual Powers, Judicial Behavior, Decision-Making Process, Institutional Analysis.

scholarly journals Think fast! The implications of emphasizing urgency in decision-making

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan J. Evans
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Diffusion Model ◽  
Drift Rate ◽  
Decision Time ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Decision Threshold ◽  
Evidence Accumulation ◽  
Rate Decrease ◽  
Linear Ballistic Accumulator

Evidence accumulation models (EAMs) have become the dominant explanation of how the decision-making process operates, proposing that decisions are the result of a process of evidence accumulation. The primary use of EAMs has been as "measurement tools" of the underlying decision-making process, where researchers apply EAMs to empirical data to estimate participants' task ability (i.e., the "drift rate"), response caution (i.e., the "decision threshold"), and the time taken for other processes (i.e., the "non-decision time"), making EAMs a powerful tool for discriminating between competing psychological theories. Recent studies have brought into question the mapping between the latent parameters of EAMs and the theoretical constructs that they are thought to represent, showing that emphasizing urgent responding -- which intuitively should selectively influence decision threshold -- may also influence drift rate and/or non-decision time. However, these findings have been mixed, leading to differences in opinion between experts in the field. The current study aims to provide a more conclusive answer to the implications of emphasizing urgent responding, providing a re-analyse of 6 data sets from previous studies using two different EAMs -- the diffusion model and the linear ballistic accumulator (LBA) -- with state-of-the-art methods for model selection based inference. The findings display clear evidence for a difference in conclusions between the two models, with the diffusion model suggesting that decision threshold and non-decision time decrease when urgency is emphasized, and the LBA suggesting that decision threshold and drift rate decrease when urgency is emphasized. Furthermore, although these models disagree regarding whether non-decision time or drift rate decrease under urgency emphasis, both show clear evidence that emphasizing urgency does not selectively influence decision threshold. These findings suggest that researchers should revise their assumptions about certain experimental manipulations, the specification of certain EAMs, or perhaps both.

Asymmetric Information and the Coherence of Legislation

1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 897-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Austen-Smith ◽  
William H. Riker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Asymmetric Information ◽  
Private Information ◽  
Agenda Setting ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Committee Decision ◽  
Game Theoretic

Legislators' beliefs, preferences, and intentions are communicated in committees and legislatures through debates, the proposal of bills and amendments, and the recording of votes. Because such information is typically distributed asymmetrically within any group of decision makers, legislators have incentives to reveal or conceal private information strategically and thus manipulate the collective decision-making process in their favor. In consequence, any committee decision may in the end reflect only the interests of a minority. We address a problem of sharing information through debate in an endogenous, agenda-setting, collective-choice process. The model is game theoretic and we find in the equilibrium to the game that at least some legislators have incentives to conceal private information. Consequently, the final committee decision can be “incoherent” by failing to reflect the preferences of all committee members fully. Additionally, we characterize the subset of legislators with any incentive to conceal data.

Using Social Network Analysis to Support Collective Decision-Making Process

2013 ◽  
pp. 87-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Buckingham Shum ◽  
Lorella Cannavacciuolo ◽  
Anna De Liddo ◽  
Luca Iandoli ◽  
Ivana Quinto
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Network ◽  
Social Network Analysis ◽  
Network Analysis ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Knowledge Organization ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Collaborative Decision Making ◽  
Collaborative Decision

Current traditional technologies, while enabling effective knowledge sharing and accumulation, seem to be less supportive of knowledge organization, use and consensus formation, as well as of collaborative decision making process. To address these limitations and thus to better foster collective decision-making around complex and controversial problems, a new family of tools is emerging able to support more structured knowledge representations known as collaborative argument mapping tools. This paper argues that online collaborative argumentation has the rather unique feature of combining knowledge organization with social mapping and that such a combination can provide interesting insights on the social processes activated within a collaborative decision making initiative. In particular, the authors investigate how Social Network Analysis can be used for the analysis of the collective argumentation process to study the structural properties of the concepts and social networks emerging from users’ interaction. Using Cohere, an online platform designed to support collaborative argumentation, some empirical findings obtained from two use cases are presented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document