scholarly journals Attitudes toward the right to autonomous decision‐making in psychiatric genetic testing: Controversial and context‐dependent

2019 ◽  
Vol 180 (8) ◽  
pp. 555-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana Strohmaier ◽  
Stephanie H. Witt ◽  
Josef Frank ◽  
Noemi Lemme ◽  
Laura Flatau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Psychiatric Genetic ◽  
Autonomous Decision ◽  
Context Dependent ◽  
The Right

scholarly journals Simple nudges that are not so easy

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
DENISE DE RIDDER ◽  
JORAM FEITSMA ◽  
MARIËTTE VAN DEN HOVEN ◽  
FLOOR KROESE ◽  
THOMAS SCHILLEMANS ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Boundary Conditions ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Instrument ◽  
Individual Choice ◽  
Autonomous Choice ◽  
Autonomous Decision ◽  
Policy Arrangements ◽  
The Right

Abstract In this paper, we critically review three assumptions that govern the debate on the legitimacy of nudging interventions as a policy instrument: (1) nudges may violate autonomous decision-making; (2) nudges lend themselves to easy implementation in public policy; and (3) nudges are a simple and effective mean for steering individual choice in the right direction. Our analysis reveals that none of these assumptions are supported by recent studies entailing unique insights into nudging from three disciplinary outlooks: ethics, public administration and psychology. We find that nudges are less of a threat to autonomous choice than critics sometimes claim, making them ethically more legitimate than often assumed. Nonetheless, because their effectiveness is critically dependent on boundary conditions, their implementation is far from easy. The findings of this analysis thus suggest new opportunities for identifying when and for whom nudge interventions are preferable to more conventional public policy arrangements.

Awareness and Decision Making in Professional Ethics

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronny Swain
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Professional Ethics ◽  
Ethical Decision Making ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Professional Autonomy ◽  
Ethical Awareness ◽  
Ethical Decisions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Aid Decision

The paper describes the development of the 1998 revision of the Psychological Society of Ireland's Code of Professional Ethics. The Code incorporates the European Meta-Code of Ethics and an ethical decision-making procedure borrowed from the Canadian Psychological Association. An example using the procedure is presented. To aid decision making, a classification of different kinds of stakeholder (i.e., interested party) affected by ethical decisions is offered. The author contends (1) that psychologists should assert the right, which is an important aspect of professional autonomy, to make discretionary judgments, (2) that to be justified in doing so they need to educate themselves in sound and deliberative judgment, and (3) that the process is facilitated by a code such as the Irish one, which emphasizes ethical awareness and decision making. The need for awareness and judgment is underlined by the variability in the ethical codes of different organizations and different European states: in such a context, codes should be used as broad yardsticks, rather than precise templates.

Would you Make the Right Decision? – Decision Making Biases in Economy - Related Dilemmas

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-66
Author(s):  
Zsuzsanna Gödör ◽  
Georgina Szabó
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Framing Effect ◽  
Economic Knowledge ◽  
Bank Account ◽  
Financial Decisions ◽  
Hungarian Population ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Decision Making Biases

Abstract As they say, money can’t buy happiness. However, the lack of it can make people’s lives much harder. From the moment we open our first bank account, we have to make lots of financial decisions in our life. Should I save some money or should I spend it? Is it a good idea to ask for a loan? How to invest my money? When we make such decisions, unfortunately we sometimes make mistakes, too. In this study, we selected seven common decision making biases - anchoring and adjustment, overconfidence, high optimism, the law of small numbers, framing effect, disposition effect and gambler’s fallacy – and tested them on the Hungarian population via an online survey. In the focus of our study was the question whether the presence of economic knowledge helps people make better decisions? The decision making biases found in literature mostly appeared in the sample as well. It proves that people do apply them when making decisions and in certain cases this could result in serious and costly errors. That’s why it would be absolutely important for people to learn about them, thus increasing their awareness and attention when making decisions. Furthermore, in our research we did find some connection between decisions and the knowledge of economics, people with some knowledge of economics opted for the better solution in bigger proportion

Ethics and Depression

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Ashcroft
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Ethics ◽  
Personal Perspective ◽  
Depression Treatment ◽  
Ethical Obligation ◽  
Autonomous Decision

This chapter discusses the ethics of depression from a personal perspective. The author, an academic who has worked in the field of medical ethics or bioethics, has suffered episodes of depression throughout his life, some lasting several months. Here he shares a few quite informal things about how these two facts about him are connected. He first considers the paradigm of autonomy and autonomous decision-making, as well as the problem with functional accounts of autonomy with regard to depression. He then reflects on an approach to ethics and depression that involves thinking about the ethics of being depressed. He also highlights two aspects of the ‘ethics of depression’: treatment and the ethical obligation to talk about it.

Parents and educators: Partners working together in an inclusive setting

1993 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 33-49
Author(s):  
Sebastian (Nello) Raciti
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
School Level ◽  
Collaborative Consultation ◽  
Local School ◽  
Participatory Decision Making ◽  
Intervention Plan ◽  
Consultation Model ◽  
Working Together ◽  
The Right ◽  
Contextual Setting

Parents have the right to participate in the educational planning for their child with a disability, however they often need assistance when interacting with professionals to ensure the best programs for their children. Professionals also require guidelines and opportunities to develop appropriate communication skills when interacting with other professionals and parents. This paper investigates the level of participatory decision-making which exists between parents and professionals, and professionals amongst themselves. The present thrust for including children with a disability in mainstream schools is used as the contextual setting for this investigation. Furthermore, the author presents an intervention plan based on the Collaborative Consultation Model to enhance the participatory decision-making skills of parents and professionals at the local school level.

scholarly journals Legal and Technical Feasibility of the GDPR’s Quest for Explanation of Algorithmic Decisions: of Black Boxes, White Boxes and Fata Morganas

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maja BRKAN ◽  
Grégory BONNET
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Legal Limits ◽  
Black Boxes ◽  
General Data ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making

Understanding of the causes and correlations for algorithmic decisions is currently one of the major challenges of computer science, addressed under an umbrella term “explainable AI (XAI)”. Being able to explain an AI-based system may help to make algorithmic decisions more satisfying and acceptable, to better control and update AI-based systems in case of failure, to build more accurate models, and to discover new knowledge directly or indirectly. On the legal side, the question whether the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides data subjects with the right to explanation in case of automated decision-making has equally been the subject of a heated doctrinal debate. While arguing that the right to explanation in the GDPR should be a result of interpretative analysis of several GDPR provisions jointly, the authors move this debate forward by discussing the technical and legal feasibility of the explanation of algorithmic decisions. Legal limits, in particular the secrecy of algorithms, as well as technical obstacles could potentially obstruct the practical implementation of this right. By adopting an interdisciplinary approach, the authors explore not only whether it is possible to translate the EU legal requirements for an explanation into the actual machine learning decision-making, but also whether those limitations can shape the way the legal right is used in practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document