The Buck-Passing Game

We consider two classes of games in which players are the vertices of a directed graph. Initially, nature chooses one player according to some fixed distribution and gives the player a buck. This player passes the buck to one of the player’s out-neighbors in the graph. The procedure is repeated indefinitely. In one class of games, each player wants to minimize the asymptotic expected frequency of times that the player receives the buck. In the other class of games, the player wants to maximize it. The PageRank game is a particular case of these maximizing games. We consider deterministic and stochastic versions of the game, depending on how players select the neighbor to which to pass the buck. In both cases, we prove the existence of pure equilibria that do not depend on the initial distribution; this is achieved by showing the existence of a generalized ordinal potential. If the graph on which the game is played admits a Hamiltonian cycle, then this is the outcome of prior-free Nash equilibrium in the minimizing game. For the minimizing game, we then use the price of anarchy and stability to measure fairness of these equilibria.

Decision-Making and the Alternative Five Factor Personality Model: Exploring the Role of Personality Traits, Age, Sex and Social Position

This study explores the relationship between decision-making style, as measured by the Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire, and personality based on alternative five-factor model along with effect of age, sex and social position on such styles. A large sample of community and undergraduate students (n = 1,562; Mage = 40.03, SD = 18.43) was analyzed. The results showed that Neuroticism and Extraversion were significantly related to the non-vigilant styles Hypervigilance, Buck-passing and Procrastination. Women scored significantly lower in Vigilance and higher in Hypervigilance, Buck-passing and Procrastinations than men. Age was significantly related to decision-making style in a U-shaped fashion. The Social Position Index was significantly related to all decision-making styles. The most predictive personality domains regarding decision-making scales were Aggressiveness (negatively) and Activity for Vigilance, and Neuroticism for Hypervigilance, Buck-passing and Procrastination. Age, sex and social position had a small/medium overall effect on the four dimensions of Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (p < 0.001) with a η2 of 0.038, 0.068, 0.050, and 0.031 for Vigilance, Hypervigilance, Buck-passing and Procrastination, respectively. Based on scores on a single factor dimension of the MDMQ, the profile of participants with higher scores was characterized by lower age, more likely to be females, lower social position, higher levels of Aggressiveness, less Activity, less Extraversion, and higher Neuroticism.

Exploring the Relationship between Socioemotional Skills and Decision-Making Styles in Health Students

Higher education in health study programs is particularly focused on the development of technical skills, despite there being a consensus on the importance of training students regarding socioemotional and life skills. The aim of this study was to characterize and explore correlations between socioemotional skills and decision-making styles in undergraduate health students. Undergraduate students (18–25 years old) were recruited at a School of Health Sciences in Portugal. Participants were characterized in terms of sociodemographic data, socioemotional skills (Study on Social and Emotional Skills questionnaire) and decision-making styles (Melbourne Decision Making questionnaire). Descriptive statistics and correlations between questionnaires´ subscales were calculated. Students presented higher scores in tolerance (34.8±3.4), cooperation (34.7±2.4), empathy (31.1±3.2), vigilance (16.0±1.9), and procrastination (9.9±2.1). Assertiveness presented negative correlations with buck-passing (rho=-0.43, p<0.01) and procrastination (rho=-0.38, p<0.01) and positive correlation with vigilance (rho=0.22, p=0.03). Students demonstrated higher values in empathy, cooperation, and tolerance skills, meaning they tend to be kind and care for others’ well-being. Vigilance style is related to assertiveness characterizing hard working leaders able to pay attention to others’ needs. Training that involves socioemotional skills might be crucial for the style of decision-making in future health professionals.

Should We Pass the Buck?

This paper is a historically informed and critical assessment of T. Scanlon’s ‘buck-passing’ conception of value, under which for an object to be of value is for it to have features that give us reasons to respond to it in certain characteristic ways. It starts by giving a fairly detailed account of the history of such views in British moral philosophy (mainly at the hands of Ross, Joseph, and Ewing), which raises the question where the novelty lies in Scanlon’s presentation. It also questions the strength of arguments in favour of buck-passing given by Scanlon and Parfit, and gives some reasons on the other side. Its conclusion is that the buck-passing view needs more support than it had yet received.

P438 Maladaptive decision-making is associated with psychological morbidity in people with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Background Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a chronic relapsing-remitting inflammatory condition. Due to its long-term, multifaceted nature, patients will need to make many complex decisions during their treatment. The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ) assesses the use of four decision-making styles. Vigilance is the only style considered adaptive, with a thorough, analytical approach. Buck-passing (avoiding responsibility), procrastination and hypervigilance (a hurried, anxious approach) are considered maladaptive. This study aimed to assess the impact of psychological morbidity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and demographic/disease factors on decision-making in IBD. Methods People over the age of 16 with IBD completed the MDMQ. Psychological morbidity was assessed by the DASS-21 questionnaire, and HRQoL by the EQ-5D-3L/EQ-5D-Y. Demographic data included age, gender, ethnicity, Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile, educational level and employment status. Diagnosis, disease duration and age at diagnosis were also recorded. Exploratory analysis of all variables against scores for each of the four decision-making styles was conducted. Significant results were used to perform multivariate analysis. All statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics software (v26). Results 172 patients were studied (94 CD, 75 UC, 3 IBD-U, 68 (39.5%) male), median age 46.5 (16-83). Median MDMQ scores for vigilance, buck-passing, procrastination and hypervigilance were 10/12, 3/12, 2/10 and 3/10 respectively. Multivariate analysis showed strong positive associations between psychological morbidity scores and all three maladaptive decision-making styles: buck-passing (F(1, 95)=12.512, p=0.001), procrastination (F(1, 115)=35.009, p&lt;0.001) and hypervigilance (F(1, 114)=34.342, p&lt;0.001). Age and duration of disease were not associated with decision making style. Current employment and higher HRQoL scores were significantly associated with greater degrees of buck-passing (F(3,95)=5.100, p=0.003; and F(1, 95)=6.351, p=0.013 respectively). A diagnosis of CD was associated with lower vigilance score (F(2, 133)=3.224, p=0.043). Conclusion People with IBD are likely to have an adaptive decision-making style, demonstrated by a high median vigilance score. However, psychological morbidity is associated with maladaptive decision-making – an important consideration for clinicians and in shared decision making. Further studies are required to determine whether interventions for psychological morbidity can improve maladaptive decision-making.

The Influence the Qatari-Israeli and the Qatari-American Relations on the Qatar's Arab Policy

As Qatar’s ambitions to become a regional player grew, it repeatedly offered to broker peace between Israel and the Arab states, and also tried to negotiate between conflicting parties. But Sunni Gulf States are irritated by this mediation and suppose that Doha tries to undermine stability of Arab countries. This is the reason for the tension in Doha&apos;s relations with Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. As a result, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt declared a blockade on Qatar in June 2017. They accused Qatar of supporting terrorism, demanded to break off all ties with Iran and to close the Turkish military base on its own territory. Qatar tries to ease tensions with the Gulf States by using American lobbyists, Israeli interests, and the Jewish-American community. Qatar follows defensive realism in the combination with the “buck passing” strategy – transferring the responsibility to act to other States while remaining on the sidelines. This is transferring the responsibility to act to the U.S. Qatar&apos;s relations with Israel and the Jewish-American community should shift the U.S. position in favor of Qatar. The main conclusions are the following: 1) there is little chance of luck lobbying in the U.S. for any interests of any State that cooperates with Iran. But the development of Qatari-Israeli relations makes it difficult to accuse Qatar of supporting Iran; 2) the development of Qatari – Saudi crisis shows that attempt both rival parties to “buck-pass” by one superpower is inefficient. The reason is that both Qatar and Saudi coalition act like US&apos;s clients.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN PAKISTAN AND UNITED STATES RELATIONS (2008-2019)

The ambit of Pakistan’s relationship with the United States is based on convergence as well as divergence of interests, whereby the United States kept intense engagement followed by periods of utter indifference. Most of the times mutual mistrust and suspicions makeshift the policy parameters to the strategic impasse. Considering the trends of the relations, the US policy revolves around the struggle for global hegemony with policy parameters of off-shore balancing and buck-passing, and Pakistan is mainly focused on security imperatives. This piece of research investigates that what are grounds of conflicts between Pakistan and the United States relations? The study is conducted by explanatory and analytical approaches. Data sources are both primary and secondary where for primary source data was collected through Interviews with ministry of defence and foreign office. The United States and Pakistan relations remained uneasy due to mistrust and accusations and the US preference to India in the region in general and in Afghanistan in particular and the China’s growing influence in the region. The need is to understand Pakistan’s security concerns, an acknowledgment of the contribution to the war against terror and above all to revive cooperation for regional peace and prosperity.

3. Structural Realism

This chapter examines why states pursue power from the perspective of structural realism. It considers a body of realist theories that argue that states have deep concern for the balance of power and compete among themselves either to gain power at the expense of others, or at least to make sure they do not lose power. This competition for power makes for a dangerous world where states sometimes fight each other. There are, however, important differences among structural realists. The chapter first explains why states want power and how much power they want before discussing the causes of war. These theoretical issues are illuminated with a case study that assesses whether China can rise peacefully according to offensive realism vs. defensive realism. Along the way, concepts such as the security dilemma, offence–defence balance, central war, buck-passing, unipolarity, bipolarity, and multipolarity, and deterrence are analysed.