Search results

Image theory has been used, in numerous studies, as a basis for understanding and describing the decision‐making activity of managers in both cooperative and competitive environments. The fundamental division of duties prescribed by image theory – namely adoption decisions and progress decision – maps very well to the adaptability requirements of intelligent agents. The issues of adaptive planning and execution monitoring in agents can be well served by applying the empirical lessons learned from the application of image theory across groups of decision makers. This paper explores the concepts of adoption and progress decisions in the context of image theory and provides a basis for creating image‐theoretic agents. This paper sets the foundation for an interdisciplinary bridge between Beach and Mitchell’s Image Theory for human decision making, and the construction of intelligent agents. We begin by presenting image theory and describing its use among human decision makers. We then show how the mechanisms of image theory can be implemented in an agent‐based architecture to implement both execution monitoring and adaptive planning. This is done through the image‐theoretic constructs of progress decisions and adoption decisions. We conclude by presenting logic‐programming implementation of the Imaginal Agent Architecture that supports the adaptive planning and execution monitoring of agents through the use of meta‐level constructs for adoption and progress decisions.

Paradox has been an instrument to challenge the traditional expected utility theory. Paradox arises from the inconsistency between the empirical or experimental results and the theoretical deductions. In the expected utility theory field, there are many paradoxes or effects showing behaviors that are contradictory to the “theoretical” ones. Many studies questioned the validity of the expected utility theory by means of these paradoxes; while many others disqualified the expected utility theory as a descriptive model for human decision making behaviors. Among these paradoxes or effects, the Allais Paradox raised by Allais in 1953 is the most famous one.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify a number of important facts about info‐gap decision theory.

Theorems are put forward to rebut claims made about info‐gap decision theory in papers published in this journal and elsewhere.

Info‐gap's robustness model is a simple instance of the most famous model in classical decision theory for the treatment of decision problems subject to severe uncertainty, namely Wald's maximin model. This simple instance is the equivalent of the well‐established model known universally as radius of stability. Info‐gap's robustness model has an inherent local orientation. Therefore, it is in principle unable to address the fundamental difficulties presented by the type of severe uncertainty that is postulated by info‐gap decision theory.

These findings caution against accepting the assertions made in the info‐gap literature about: info‐gap decision theory's role and place in decision making under severe uncertainty; and its ability to model, analyze, and manage severe uncertainty.

This paper exposes the serious difficulties with claims made in papers published in this journal and elsewhere regarding the place and role of info‐gap decision theory in decision theory and its ability to handle severe uncertainty.

To: evaluate Prospect Theory and Cumulative Prospect Theory as functional models of decision making and risk within various contexts; compare and analyze risk models and decision‐making models; evaluate models of stock risk developed by Robert Engle and related models; establish whether the models are related and have the same foundations; relate risk, decision making and options theory; and develop the foundations for a new model of decision making and risk named “belief systems”.

Critiques existing academic work in different contexts. Analyzes the shortcomings of various measures of risk, and group decision making, which was not addressed in developing Prospect Theory and Cumulative Prospect Theory. Develops the characteristics of a mew model for decision making and risk named “belief systems”, and then differentiates it from belief networks.

Decision making is a multi‐factor, multi‐dimensional process that often requires the processing of information, and thus, it is inaccurate to impose rigid models in decision making; the existing metrics for quantifying risk are inadequate; Prospect Theory and Cumulative Prospect Theory were developed using questionable methods and data, and are impractical; the analysis of probabilistic insurance and most of the theories and “effects” developed by Kahneman and Tversky's articles are invalid and impractical; Prospect Theory, Cumulative Prospect Theory, Expected Utility Theory, and market‐risk models are conceptually the same and do not account for many facets of risk and decision making; risk and decision making are better quantified and modeled using a mix of situation‐specific dynamic, quantitative and qualitative factors; belief systems can better account for the multi‐dimensional characteristics of risk and decision making.

Areas for further research include: development of dynamic market‐risk models that incorporate asset‐market psychology, liquidity, market size, frequency of trading, knowledge differences among market participants, and trading rules in each market; and further development of concepts in belief systems.

Decision making and risk assessment are multi‐criteria processes that typically require some processing of information, and thus cannot be defined accurately by rigid quantitative models; Prospect Theory and Cumulative Prospect Theory are abstract, rigid, and are not practical models for decision making; and existing market‐risk models are inaccurate, and thus the international financial system may be compromised.

The issues discussed are relevant to government regulators, central banks, judges, risk managers, executives, derivatives regulators, stock exchange regulators, legislators, psychologists, boards of directors, finance professionals, management science/operations research professionals, health‐care‐informatics professionals, scientists, engineers, and people in any situation that requires decision making and risk assessment.

The purpose of this paper is to examine Chester Barnard's decisional model utilizing the lens of image theory. The main claim is that the individual decision‐making model proposed by Barnard in his Notes on the Significance of Decisive Behavior can be evaluated within the framework of image theory.

The paper performed a comparative analysis of Barnard's and image theory's models of decision making to outline congruence and incongruence between Barnard's early conceptualization of individual decision making and the contemporary understanding of image theory.

The findings provide support to the claim that image theory is an appropriate framework to describe Barnard's model.

The unique contribution of this study is that it provides the first theoretical analysis of Barnard's model of individual decision making. Barnard's model of individual decision making is little known because it was posthumously published in his Notes on the Significance of Decisive Behavior 35 years after Barnard's death.

The purpose of this article is to explore the ability of a novel psychological theory of how people make decisions, narrative‐based decision theory, to help explain people's decisions about whether to continue investment in a research and development (R&D) project (R&D progress decisions).

The paper applies the new theory to an empirical finding of existing research on R&D progress decisions; the finding that instruction in the sunk cost principle seems to mitigate the sunk cost effect in R&D progress decision‐making.

By interpreting the empirical finding in terms of narrative‐based decision theory, the paper is able to clarify and extend an earlier explanation for the empirical finding. More specifically, by drawing on narrative‐based decision theory the paper is able to provide a more detailed explanation of how the predictor variable (sunk cost) and the moderator variable (instruction in the sunk cost principle) may exert an influence.

Based on the result of the exploration, the authors call for further investigations into narrative‐based decision theory's value in explaining R&D progress decisions, and other management decisions.

Furthermore, the authors call for investigations into how narrative‐based decision theory may help decision‐makers in improving the quality of R&D progress decisions.

Narrative‐based decision theory is a recent theory from the field of naturalistic decision‐making. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first article that, by using an example, illustrates how the theory may help in explaining the findings of empirical research on management decisions.

In disaster risk reduction (DRR), it is important to realise stakeholders’ approaches against disasters in the built environment. The purpose of this paper is to explore why stakeholders take proactive and/or reactive approaches in DRR.

Using a review of existent literature, this work scrutinises disaster theories and their applications in the built environment to develop a theoretical framework for perceiving stakeholders’ proactive and/or reactive approaches in DRR.

Stakeholders’ organisational attributes – power, legitimacy and urgency – and decision-making paradigms – value maximisation and intuitive reasoning – are fundamental factors affecting stakeholders’ approaches against disasters. Power and legitimacy of stakeholders result in a proactive approach if stakeholders consider value maximisation paradigm in their decision-making process. Powerful and legitimate stakeholders may take reactive approaches because of intuitive reasoning paradigm. Stakeholders may shift from a reactive to proactive approach and vice versa based on the combination of urgency attribute and decision-making paradigms.

It is essential to consider the classification of respective stakeholders in applying the idea of this paper. Furthermore, this paper does not attempt to validate the proposed theoretical framework empirically, but it combines stakeholder and decision-making theories by which this could be undertaken.

Little attention has been paid to systematic theorising in managing stakeholders’ approaches against disasters. Furthermore, many researchers have focused on similar underlying theories and heuristics in the context of DRR. Thus, this paper introduces a theoretical framework to examine stakeholders’ proactive and/or reactive approaches in the built environment, by synthesising stakeholder and decision-making theories.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the dominant consumer decision theory models and understand why that theory has received little empirical validation. A “decision waves” theory is proposed – an alternative, multi‐phase approach to decision making using image theory. An approach to validating empirically the multi‐phase theory is outlined.

This conceptual paper examines the foundations of modern consumer decision theory and argues for a more representative model of actual consumer decisions.

Decision waves provide a theoretical approach to represent more accurately consumer decision making and improve understanding in this foundational component of marketing. Decision waves do not change detailed empirical findings: however, they do change the macro perspective of how those findings are assembled for marketing.

An empirical test of decision waves theory is ongoing.

The concepts outlined in this paper will change segmentation, positioning and how tactical plans are developed within the marketing mix, particularly for promotional strategies.

A theoretical approach that represents decision making more accurately will bring us closer to understanding this foundational component of marketing. It provides a basis for differentiation in congested markets.

Brain and behavioral research is a hallmark of knowledge and understanding within modern society and has taken on greater importance in the commercial context; as this area unfolds, the intersection of the science, technology and marketing is an important and topical area for exploration.

This work tracks the parallel history of the technologies and science of the brain because it grows in relevance for the study of marketing and consumer behavior. It is an historical review of the usage of technologies to measure brain activity and behavior, parallel to the development of psychological theories created to account for human decision-making from the 1940s until the present.

This essay presents a new conception of “closure” and “momentum,” as envisioned by social construction of technology and technological momentum theories, arriving at a new concept for inclusion called “convergence” which offers a multifactor explanation for the acceptance, technical implementation and its commercial application.

It is an original adaptation of theories from across several fields that yields insight into the integration of science, technology, society and business.

The purpose of this paper is to apply grounded theory methodology to report on an empirical case which develops emergent theories on the human complexities of managerial decision‐making and the synonymous task of managing.

A structured research approach was applied in gathering and analysing data from all actors within a small private sector enterprise. The key objective was to discover what the owner‐manager and all employees perceived as important issues with regard to the managing of the business during a period of post‐takeover. In‐depth on‐site and off‐site interviews were carried out over an extended period.

Emergent theory exposes actors' disputed perceptions of how the business had been managed and ought to be managed, and, the judgments and decisions that had been made and consequently should be made. Revealed is a complex cognitive and behavioural web of human interactions and deep‐seated management‐employee discord that whilst threatening the actual survival of the business appears not to impede questionable practices, both by management and staff. Through the application of grounded theory methodology emergent constructs are discussed against existing knowledge that exposes new insights into management decision theory and the managing of an enterprise.

The process of theory generation whilst grounded in a substantive inquiry has the capacity to generate further research and tentative explanations at higher levels of understanding. From the research reported, questions beyond the substantive case can develop a broader theoretical and practical agenda – for example, issues of other actors' involvement in management decision making and the intrinsic part psychological factors play in the structuring of decisions.

Based on the finding from an empirical study the paper reveals significant practical managerial issues in the day‐to‐day and strategic managing of an enterprise. From a researcher's perspective, the paper critically demonstrates the functionality of grounded theory in management inquiry.

This paper advances the theoretical and practical necessity for the enlargement of the stock of qualitatively bounded research that focuses on grounded theory applications, management practice and decision theory.