What Technology Says About Decision-Making: Evidence from Cricket's Decision Review System (DRS)

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ram Shivakumar
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Review System

scholarly journals Factors Influencing in Clinical Decision Making of Nurse: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 135-145
Author(s):  
Baitus Sholehah ◽  
Asti Melani Astari ◽  
Rinik Eko Kapti
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Review System ◽  
Nursing Knowledge ◽  
Pathological Conditions ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
Knowledge Environment ◽  
Careful Assessment

Clinical decision making is important for nurses to do. Clinical decision making is a complex process consisting of careful assessment of pathological conditions and patient history and the use of nursing knowledge and learning based on critical thinking experiences. Improper clinical decision making will have fatal consequences for patients This review system was compiled using Proquest. Science Direct and Pubmed databases. Article selection is carried out to identify relevant articles then screening is conducted to adjust the inclusion criteria. 13 articles were obtained in accordance with inclusion criteria and reviewed by using JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute Levels). Data shows that nurses have a very important role in clinical decision making. Nurses' clinical decision making is considered due to the risks faced by patients, thus the nurses should think critically. Clinical decision making for nurses is influenced by several factors including experience, knowledge, environment, team, supervisor support, and professionalism.

scholarly journals Deconstructing Online Hospitality Review Systems

2022 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Quan Xiao ◽  
Shun Li ◽  
Xing Zhang ◽  
Fuguo Zhang ◽  
Qi Yue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Reference Value ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Improved Method ◽  
Review System ◽  
Design Features ◽  
Kano Model ◽  
Internet Age ◽  
Online Travel

Online hospitality reviews have an important impact on consumers’ travel and hospitality booking decisions in the Internet age. A well-designed online hospitality review system is crucial to reduce the uncertainty of consumers’ decision making, to grasp the actual needs of consumers, and to improve the quality experience of platforms. In this context, this research conducts an empirical study on the design features of online hospitality review systems based on the Kano model. First, the paper analyzes the design features of online hospitality review systems. Then, the paper proposes an improved method to classify design features on the basis of the Kano questionnaire design and survey data. Finally, the paper quantitatively measures their importance in online hospitality review systems. Results can provide scientific basis for online travel platforms or hospitality operators to optimize the design of online hospitality review systems and to obtain reference value to increase the satisfaction of consumers’ decision making.

scholarly journals Development of Gateway Review System for Supporting Collaborative Decision-Making through Project Life Cycle

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 43-54
Author(s):  
Seung-Woo Shin ◽  
June-Seong Yi ◽  
Jee-Hee Lee ◽  
Kyung-Rog Park ◽  
Ji-Youn Lim
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Review System ◽  
Collaborative Decision Making ◽  
Project Life Cycle ◽  
Project Life ◽  
Collaborative Decision

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.

Degraded conditions: Confounds in the study of decision making – ERRATUM

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Louise Antony
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making

The primacy of conscious decision making – ERRATUM

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conscious Decision

The primacy of conscious decision making – RETRACTION

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conscious Decision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document