Using Behavioral Science Principles to Train Small Unit Decision Making

2010 ◽  
pp. 150-159
Author(s):  
V Spiker ◽  
Joan Johnston
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Small Unit

Supporting Responsive Federal Drug Sentencing Through Education in the Workshop on Science-Informed Decision Making

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-22
Author(s):  
Hon. Nancy Gertner ◽  
Dr. Judith Edersheim ◽  
Dr. Robert Kinscherff ◽  
Cassandra Snyder
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Probation Officers ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Sentencing Decisions ◽  
Federal Judiciary ◽  
Federal Districts ◽  
Federal Judges

On the federal level, judicial education in sentencing has been focused primarily on preparing judges to calculate and apply the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. But in an advisory guidelines context, making individualized assessments in drug cases requires education in the science of addictions, the drivers of behavior, and the prospects for behavior change when substances are involved. Neuroscience and the sciences of human behavior provide clarifying insight into substance-driven behaviors and cognitions that are routinely encountered in federal drug cases. These disciplines support individualized sentencing by shedding new light on the nature of inhibitory control, the reasonable expectations for relapse, and the distinctions that can be drawn based on science between different treatment interventions. In this Article, we report on the Workshop on Science-Informed Decision Making, an education initiative in the federal judiciary. Since 2016, it has provided education in neuroscience and behavioral science, as well as skills training in individualizing sentences using insights from that science, to U.S. district judges, magistrate judges, and pretrial services and probation officers in thirty-two federal districts. We describe the case-study-based instructional approach of the workshop, including some of the misconceptions about addiction behavior it addresses, and explain why we believe that this kind of education helps federal judges, and pretrial services and probation officers, craft more responsive sentencing decisions and recommendations.

scholarly journals Apprendre à regarder pour voir

lieuxdits ◽  
2011 ◽  
pp. 13-17
Author(s):  
Joëlle Houdé ◽  
Damien Claeys
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Le Corbusier ◽  
American Economic Review

/ Citation : Joëlle Houdé et Damien Claeys, "Apprendre à regarder pour voir", lieuxdits#1, UCLouvain - Louvain-la-Neuve : Faculté LOCI, juin 2011, pp.13-17. Bibliographie I. Ramonet, Propagandes silencieuses, Paris : Gallimard, 2004. E. Husserl, Méditations cartésiennes, II, 14, Paris : PUF, 2004 (Rééd. 1950) J.-J. Wittezaele, L’homme rela- tionnel, Paris : Seuil (Coll. : Couleur psy), 2003 R. Van Durme, Bruxelles, 2007 N. Rase, Bruxelles, 2010 W. Benjamin, « Petite histoire de la photographie » in L’homme, le langage, la culture, Paris : Denoël C. Honoré, Éloge de la lenteur, Paris : Marabout, 2005 H. Gaudin, Pour trait, Colloque du Centenaire Du dessein au dessin, Bruxelles : La lettre volée, (Coll. : Essais), 2007 Le Corbusier, L’Atelier de la Recherche Patiente, Paris : Vincent, Fréal et Cie, 1960 Assouline P., Cartier-Bresson, L’œil du siècle, Paris : Gallimard, 2001 H. Cartier-Bresson, "L’instant décisif ", in Images à la sauvette, Paris : Verve,1952 H. Gaudin, Pour trait, Colloque du Centenaire Du dessein au dessin, Bruxelles : La lettre volée, (Coll. : Essais), 2007 Ludovic Blanckaert & Adrien Verschuere, "Pierre Von Meiss, Interview" in Drese J. (Dir.), Les cahiers de l’architecture, ISA Saint- Luc de Tournai, n°14 A. Lemaire, Autriche, 2008 M. Fabre, Autriche, 2008 J.-P. Durand, "Entretien avec Luigi Snozzi", La représentation du projet, Paris : La Villette, 2003 Architecture Saint-Luc Bruxelles 2000- 1, Bruxelles : ARC, 1999, p.15 Ch. Duboux, Le dessin comme langage, Lausanne : PPUR, 2009 Le Corbusier, Le dessin comme outil, catalogue d’exposition, Lyon : Fage, 2006 Th. de Quirini , Liège, mention bac 1, 2010 S.Beuzart, Cologne, 1er prix bac 1, 2010 O. Julienne, Figino et environs, 1er prix bac 2, 2010 H. Cartier-Bresson, "L’ins- tant décisif ", in Images à la sauvette, Paris : Verve, 1952 G. Bachelard, La formation de l’esprit scientifique, Paris : Vrin, 1938 (Rééd. 2004) A. Machado, Champs de Castille, Paris : Gallimard, 1973 (Rééd. 1936, p. 205) D. Duchemin, L’ âme du photo- graphe, Paris : Pearson, 2004 Cartier-Bresson H., op. cit., Paris : Verve, 1952 D. Duchemin, L’âme du pho- tographe, Paris : Pearson, 2004. H. Simon, "Theories of Decision-Making in economics and Behavioral Science", American Economic Review, 49, n° 1, 1959

Supreme Court Decision Making on Insanity Acquittees Does not Depend on Research Conducted by the Behavioral Science Community: Jones v. United States

1984 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-525
Author(s):  
Winsor C. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Judgments ◽  
Offense Severity ◽  
Insanity Acquittees

The United States Supreme Court's decision making on the Jones v. United States issue of an insanity acquit tee's disposition, when his mental hospitalization exceeds his maximum prison sentence if convicted, is analyzed from the perspective of relevant behavioral science research. The Court's “common sense” that insanity acquittal reflects a likelihood of remaining mentally ill and in need of treatment is not sustained by the available empirical evidence. The Court's assertion of no necessary correlation between acquittee offense severity and length of recovery is also belied by the available research. The Supreme Court has ratified social judgments concerning insanity acquittees rather than utilizing available behavioral research to make more rational policy determinations. The statistically insignificant insanity acquittal disposition could be assessed from a more informed perspective.

Training and Assessing Complex Decision-Making in a Virtual Environment

2002 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 871-882 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Pleban ◽  
Michael D. Matthews ◽  
Margaret S. Salter ◽  
David E. Eakin
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Virtual Environment ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Urban Setting ◽  
Training Procedure ◽  
Small Unit ◽  
Subjective Assessments ◽  
Computer Generated Forces ◽  
Complex Decision Making ◽  
Complex Decision

The current report describes a procedure for training and assessing complex decision-making in a virtual environment. Focusing on small unit leaders, 7 experienced and 7 inexperienced Army platoon leaders performed missions in a combat simulator, where they were required to direct the activities of 3 subordinate leaders and computer-generated forces in 4 different operations in a virtual urban setting. Objective and subjective assessments of the training value of the simulations showed that both experienced an inexperienced platoon leaders improved their decision-making across the four missions, and both groups rated this “virtual environment” training procedure as useful and positive. Lessons learned and implications for designing similar training protocols for other domains are discussed.

scholarly journals The imperative of interpretable machines

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Stoyanovich ◽  
Jay Joseph Van Bavel ◽  
Tessa West
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Identity ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Moral Cognition ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Ethical Decisions ◽  
Road Map ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
Trust In Institutions

Fairness in machine-assisted decision making is critical to consider, since a lack of fairness can harm individuals or groups, erode trust in institutions and systems, and reinforce structural discrimination. To avoid making ethical mistakes, or amplifying them, it is important to ensure that the algorithms we develop are fair and promote trust. We argue that the marriage of techniques from behavioral science and computer science is essential to develop algorithms that make ethical decisions and ensure the welfare of society. Specifically, we focus on the role of procedural justice, moral cognition, and social identity in promoting trust in algorithms and offer a road map for future research on the topic.

Behavioral Science and Climate Policy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Howlett ◽  
Stuti Rawat
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Policy Issue ◽  
Wicked Problem ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Analysis And Design ◽  
Change Policy

Behavioral science consists of the systematic analysis of processes underlying human behavior through experimentation and observation, drawing on knowledge, research, and methods from a variety of fields such as economics, psychology, and sociology. Because policymaking involves efforts to modify or alter the behavior of policy-takers and centers on the processes of decision-making in government, it has always been concerned with behavioral psychology. Classic studies of decision-making in the field derived their frameworks and concepts from psychology, and the founder of policy sciences, Harold Lasswell, was himself trained as a behavioral political scientist. Hence, it should not be surprising that the use of behavioral science is a feature of many policy areas, including climate change policy. This is given extra emphasis, however, because climate change policymaking and the rise of climate change as a policy issue coincides with a resurgence in behaviorally inspired policy analysis and design brought about by the development of behavioral economics. Thus efforts to deal with climate change have come into being at a time when behavioral governance has been gaining traction worldwide under the influence of works by, among others, Kahneman and Tversky, Thaler, and Sunstein. Such behavioral governance studies have focused on the psychological and cognitive behavioral processes in individuals and collectives, in order to inform, design, and implement different modes of governing. They have been promoted by policy scholars, including many economists working in the area who prefer its insights to those put forward by classical or neoclassical economics. In the context of climate change policy, behavioral science plays two key roles—through its use of behaviorally premised policy instruments as new modes of public policy being used or proposed to be used, in conjunction with traditional climate change policy tools; and as a way of understanding some of the barriers to compliance and policy design encountered by governments in combating the “super wicked problem” of climate change. Five kinds of behavioral tools have been found to be most commonly used in relation to climate change policy: provision of information, use of social norms, goal setting, default rules, and framing. A large proportion of behavioral tools has been used in the energy sector, because of its importance in the context of climate change action and the fact that energy consumption is easy to monitor, thereby facilitating impact assessment.

The Testing Phase for the Small Unit Decision Making (SUDM) Assessment Battery

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karol G. Ross ◽  
Iris D. Rivera ◽  
Regan E. Lineberger ◽  
Jennifer Vogel-Walcutt ◽  
Jennifer K. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Small Unit ◽  
Assessment Battery ◽  
Testing Phase

The psychology of decision making in a unified behavioral science

2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-42
Author(s):  
Keith E. Stanovich
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Unique Feature ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Multiple Systems ◽  
Unified View ◽  
Preference Structures ◽  
The Mind

The cognitive psychology of judgment and decision making helps to elaborate Gintis's unified view of the behavioral sciences by highlighting the fact that decisions result from multiple systems in the mind. It also adds to the unified view the idea that the potential to self-critique preference structures is a unique feature of human cognition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document