scholarly journals Effects of meditation on decision bias induced by weak stimulus signals.

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 325-325
Author(s):  
E. Scilipoti ◽  
D. Kim ◽  
T. Watanabe
Keyword(s):  
Decision Bias ◽  
Weak Stimulus

scholarly journals Coping with Loss Aversion in the Newsvendor Model

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianwu Sun ◽  
Xinsheng Xu
Keyword(s):  
Expected Utility ◽  
Loss Aversion ◽  
Confidence Level ◽  
Profit Maximization ◽  
Optimal Order ◽  
Market Demand ◽  
Newsvendor Model ◽  
Order Quantity ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Optimal Order Quantity

We introduce loss aversion into the decision framework of the newsvendor model. By introducing the loss aversion coefficientλ, we propose a novel utility function for the loss-averse newsvendor. First, we obtain the optimal order quantity to maximize the expected utility for the loss-averse newsvendor who is risk-neutral. It is found that this optimal order quantity is smaller than the expected profit maximization order quantity in the classical newsvendor model, which may help to explain the decision bias in the classical newsvendor model. Then, to reduce the risk which originates from the fluctuation in the market demand, we achieve the optimal order quantity to maximize CVaR about utility for the loss-averse newsvendor who is risk-averse. We find that this optimal order quantity is smaller than the optimal order quantity to maximize the expected utility above and is decreasing in the confidence levelα. Further, it is proved that the expected utility under this optimal order quantity is decreasing in the confidence levelα, which verifies that low risk implies low return. Finally, a numerical example is given to illustrate the obtained results and some management insights are suggested for the loss-averse newsvendor model.

Air pollutions and loan decision bias

2022 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 102420
Author(s):  
Zhongfei Chen ◽  
Ming Jin ◽  
Fanglin Chen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Bias ◽  
Air Pollutions

Weekend effect in endovascular stroke treatment: do treatment decisions, procedural times, and outcome depend on time of admission?

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omid Nikoubashman ◽  
Thomas Probst ◽  
Kolja Schürmann ◽  
Ahmed E Othman ◽  
Oliver Matz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Working Hours ◽  
Epidemiologic Studies ◽  
Weekend Effect ◽  
Out Of Hours ◽  
Stroke Treatment ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Angiography Suite ◽  
Time Of Admission

BackgroundEpidemiologic studies identified a ‘weekend effect’ or ‘out-of-hours effect’, which implies that procedural and clinical outcomes of patients with stroke, who are admitted out-of-hours, are less favorable than for patients admitted during working-hours.ObjectiveTo determine (1) whether our procedural times and clinical outcome were affected by an out-of-hours effect and (2) whether the decision in favor of, or against, endovascular stroke treatment (EST) depends on the time of admission.MethodsBetween February 2010 and January 2015, 6412 consecutive patients presenting with symptoms of acute ischemic stroke were evaluated for EST eligibility according to established local protocols and generally accepted consensus criteria, and dichotomized into working-hours and out-of-hours cohorts according to admission times. Within both groups, patients given EST were identified and the rate of treatment decision, procedural times, and clinical outcome were compared and analyzed.ResultsClinical and radiological features of patients admitted in working-hours and out-of-hours did not differ significantly. Procedural times and clinical outcome were not affected by an out-of-hours effect (p≥0.054). 221/240 (92.1%) out-of-hours patients and 154/166 (92.8%) working-hours patients who were eligible for EST were transferred to the angiography suite for EST (p=0.798). The rationale not to treat patients who were eligible for EST did not differ between working-hours and out-of-hours admission (p=0.756).ConclusionsIt is possible to produce competitive procedural times regardless of the time of admission and to prevent a treatment decision bias when standard operating procedures are applied consistently.

scholarly journals Hedging Risks in the Loss-Averse Newsvendor Problem with Backlogging

Mathematics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoqing Liu ◽  
Felix T. S. Chan ◽  
Xinsheng Xu
Keyword(s):  
Value At Risk ◽  
Profit Maximization ◽  
Newsvendor Problem ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Optimal Order ◽  
Newsvendor Model ◽  
Order Quantity ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Optimal Order Quantity

This paper studies the optimal order decisions for the loss-averse newsvendor problem with backordering and contributes to the risk hedging issue in the newsvendor model. The Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) measure is applied to quantify the potential risks for the loss-averse newsvendor in a backordering setting, and we obtain the optimal order quantity for a loss-averse newsvendor to maximize the CVaR of utility. It is found that the optimal order quantity to maximize the CVaR objective could be bigger or smaller than the expected profit maximization (EPM) order quantity, which provides an alternative explanation on decision bias in the newsvendor model. This study also reveals that the optimal order quantity for a loss-averse newsvendor to maximize expected utility with backordering is smaller than the EPM order quantity, which implies that backordering encourages the loss-averse newsvendor to order fewer items. Sensitivity analyses are performed to investigate the properties of the optimal order quantities and managerial insights are suggested. This paper provides a novel method for the risk management of the loss-averse newsvendor model and presents several new ordering policies for the retailers in practice.

scholarly journals Reward Enhances Pain Discrimination in Humans

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 1191-1199
Author(s):  
Susanne Becker ◽  
Martin Löffler ◽  
Ben Seymour
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Sensory Input ◽  
Signal Strength ◽  
Diffusion Modeling ◽  
Drift Diffusion ◽  
Discriminative Ability ◽  
Discriminative Performance ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Sensory Signal ◽  
Human Volunteers

The notion that reward inhibits pain is a well-supported observation in both humans and animals, allowing suppression of pain reflexes to acquired rewarding stimuli. However, a blanket inhibition of pain by reward would also impair pain discrimination. In contrast, early counterconditioning experiments implied that reward might actually spare pain discrimination. To test this hypothesis, we investigated whether discriminative performance was enhanced or inhibited by reward. We found in adult human volunteers ( N = 25) that pain-based discriminative ability is actually enhanced by reward, especially when reward is directly contingent on discriminative performance. Drift-diffusion modeling shows that this relates to an augmentation of the underlying sensory signal strength and is not merely an effect of decision bias. This enhancement of sensory-discriminative pain-information processing suggests that whereas reward can promote reward-acquiring behavior by inhibition of pain in some circumstances, it can also facilitate important discriminative information of the sensory input when necessary.

Complicating or simplifying? Investigating the mixed impacts of online product information on consumers’ purchase decisions

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 263-287
Author(s):  
Yan Yu ◽  
Ben Qianqian Liu ◽  
Jin-Xing Hao ◽  
Chuanqi Wang
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Product Information ◽  
Purchase Decisions ◽  
Decision Strategy ◽  
Market Outcomes ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Set Size ◽  
Product Presentation ◽  
Choice Set

Purpose Prior literature indicates conflicting effects of online product information, which may complicate or simplify consumer purchase decisions. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how different online product information (i.e. the choice set size and the popularity information and its presentation) affect consumers’ decision making and the related market outcomes. Design/methodology/approach This research relies on information-processing theories and social learning theory. By stepwise conducting two 2×2 within-subject factorial design experiments, this research examines the effects of the choice set size, product popularity information and product presentation on consumers’ decision making and the aggregated market outcomes. Findings The results show that product popularity information led consumers to either simplify or complicate their decision strategy, depending on the size of the choice sets. Additionally, presenting products by their popularity in descending order resulted in consumers making decisions with a larger decision bias. The results also show that the presence of product popularity was more likely to forge a “superstar” structure in a large market. Practical implications The research suggests that e-retailers and e-marketplace operators should carefully utilize product popularity information. Multiple mechanisms that shape different shopping environments with different orders are necessary to create a long-tailed market structure. Originality/value This study found the mixed effects of product popularity information when it is presented in different environments (i.e. the large/small choice set and the sorted/randomized product presentation). The overuse of popularity information may induce consumers’ decision bias.

scholarly journals Mirror, Mirror on the Retail Wall: Self-Focused Attention Promotes Reliance on Feelings in Consumer Decisions

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 586-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah H. Chang ◽  
Iris W. Hung
Keyword(s):  
Real Life ◽  
The Self ◽  
Focused Attention ◽  
Charitable Donation ◽  
Charitable Donations ◽  
Consumer Decisions ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Self Construal ◽  
Mirror Mirror ◽  
Consistent Support

The authors propose that consumers’ increased self-focused attention promotes their relative reliance on affective feelings when they make decisions. The authors test this hypothesis in a variety of consumption domains and decision tasks, including real-life, consequential charitable donations. Consistent support from five experiments with more than 1,770 participants shows that (1) valuations of the decision outcome increase when consumers with high (low) self-focus adopt a feeling-based (reason-based) strategy. The hypothesized effect of self-focus on relative reliance on feelings in decision making is (2) moderated by self-construal. Furthermore, greater attention to the self (3) increases evaluations of products that are affectively superior but (4) decreases evaluations of products that are affectively inferior and (5) exerts little influence on evaluations of products that are less affective in nature (i.e., utilitarian products). Finally, self-focused attention (6) amplifies a decision bias typically attributed to feeling-based judgments, known as scope-insensitivity bias, in a hypothetical laboratory study and in a real-life, consequential charitable donation. Theoretical and marketing implications are discussed.

Cognitive Biases, Non-Rational Judgments, and Public Perceptions of Climate Change

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Zaval ◽  
James F. M. Cornwell
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Short Circuit ◽  
Human Action ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Cognitive Resources ◽  
Processing Load ◽  
Decision Bias ◽  
Decision Context ◽  
Sustainability Challenges

In recent years, scientists have identified cognitive processes that short-circuit our deliberative faculties. In the domain of climate change in particular, a number of psychological barriers and biases may disrupt typical discourse and reflection and may even prevent those who are aware of climate change from taking action to mitigate or reduce its impact. These processes include the use of heuristic versions of calculation-based decisions to reduce processing load, which can make climate change judgments responsive to situational factors in the immediate decision context. Recent research in the decision sciences provides insight into how common biases in judgment inhibit rational deliberation about climate change, which may lead to the gap between society’s recognition of environmental problems and society’s frequent failure to address them appropriately. These insights involve the finite nature of human attention and cognitive resources, the complex interactions of personal experience and emotion, the challenges that uncertainty and risk place on behavior, and the profoundly social nature of human action. Understanding these barriers and systematic biases have led to a set of potential interventions, which demonstrate how practitioners can put research insights into practice in order to address a variety of sustainability challenges. One important direction for these interventions involves changing the decision context in ways that account for decision bias (e.g., using green defaults) and triggering more adaptive decisions as a result.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document