Archivio per gennaio 2015



31
Gen
15

Sistemica: istruzioni per l’uso

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

 Summary 

The systemic approach has always been an integral part of the scientific activity and, contrary to some current simplifications, it has never been in conflict with the reduc-tionist approach. In times of strongest crossing interdisciplinary dynamics, the debate on the meaning of systemic requires a new understanding and we feel the need for a more theoretical foundation. These reflections intend to frame the problem from the point of view of theoretical physics 

See on aiems.eu

Annunci
30
Gen
15

Network Analysis in the Legal Domain: A complex model for European Union legal sources

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond
Legislators, designers of legal information systems, as well as citizens face often problems due to the interdependence of the laws and the growing number of references needed to interpret them. Quantifying this complexity is not an easy task. In this paper, we introduce the “Legislation Network” as a novel approach to address related problems. We have collected an extensive data set of a more than 60-year old legislation corpus, as published in the Official Journal of the European Union, and we further analysed it as a complex network, thus gaining insight into its topological structure. Among other issues, we have performed a temporal analysis of the evolution of the Legislation Network, as well as a robust resilience test to assess its vulnerability under specific cases that may lead to possible breakdowns. Results are quite promising, showing that our approach can lead towards an enhanced explanation in respect to the structure and evolution of legislation properties
See on arxiv.org

30
Gen
15

What is sociometry?

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

What is sociometry?

Pioneer of sociometry, Dr. Jakob Moreno, defined it as “the inquiry into the evolution and organisation of groups and the position of individuals within them.” He went on to describe it as “the …science of group organization – it attacks the problem not from the outer structure of the group, the group surface, but from the inner structure. Sociometric explorations reveal the hidden structures that give a group its form: the alliances, the subgroups, the hidden beliefs, the forbidden agendas, the ideological agreements, the ‘stars’ of the show.”

Sociometry aims to bring about greater spontaneity (willingness to act) and creativity within groups of people.  Greater spontaneity and creativity brings about greater group task effectiveness and satisfaction amongst its members.  Sociometry teaches us that the quality of an outcome is directly related to the quality of relationship between the people trying to generate that outcome.  Research sociometry is an exploration of the social networks within which we exist.  This type of enquiry provides us with social maps and shows us how strongly people are connected to each other.  The full power of sociometry is realised when people have access to the information on such maps and are then able to make meaning of it themselves and to engage with each other about what lies behind their social choices.  Sociometry emphasises encounter.  Applied, or action, sociometry uses a range of methods to assist groups to uncover, develop and deepen their social connections.  So, in a workplace for example, using a question such as “Who would you go to if you needed advice on a work problem,” applied sociometry invites people to make those choices overt and then to discuss what lies behind those choices:  Why did you choose this person?  Why did you choose me?  What does that information mean and what can we do with it so that we can get better at achieving our shared purpose?

See on quantumshifting.wordpress.com

30
Gen
15

‘Gambler’s Fallacy’ Makes Life Unfair

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

The “gambler’s falacy” – the mistaken belief that a small sequence of events will look like a bigger one – leads to unfairness for immigrants, bank loan applicants, baseball batters and probably a lot of other people. 

Suppose you’re watching a baseball game, and your favorite player, a terrific hitter with a .320 average, has struck out three times in a row. If you’re like most people, you might think, “He’s due!” – and conclude that on his fourth at-bat, he’s likely to get a hit.

Now suppose that you are working in a college admissions office. Your job is to evaluate 200 applicants, about 50 of whom will be admitted. You’ve just accepted three in a row, and now you might be inclined to think that the next two are unlikely to deserve admission. You might even evaluate their applications with that skeptical thought in mind.

A lot of people are prone to this “gambler’s fallacy” – the mistaken belief that a small sequence of events will look a lot like a bigger one. Flip a coin 1,000 times, and there’s a very high probability it will come up heads half the time. But flip a coin five times, and you’ll find some surprises. Heads-tails-heads-tails-heads is no more likely than heads-heads-heads-heads-tails, for example. When we’re dealing with small numbers, our intuition leads us the wrong way.

See on bloombergview.com

29
Gen
15

A Political Justification of Nudging

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond
Abstract: Nudge policies are typically justified from paternalistic premises: nudges are acceptable if they benefit the individuals who are nudged. A tacit assumption behind this strategy is that the biases of decision that choice architects attempt to eliminate generate costs that are paid mainly by the decision-makers. For example, in the case of intertemporal discounting, the costs of preference reversal are paid by the discounters. We argue that this assumption is unwarranted. In the real world the costs of reversal are often transferred onto other individuals. But if this is the case, the biases create externalities, and nudges are best justified from a political rather than paternalistic standpoint. 
See on www-ceel.economia.unitn.it

29
Gen
15

How emotions influence what we buy | Giancarlo Mirmillo | LinkedIn

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

People believe that the choices they make result from a rational analysis of available alternatives.

In reality, however, emotions greatly influence and, in many cases, even determine our decisions. In his book, Descartes Error, Antonio Damasio, professor of neuroscience at the University of Southern California, argues that emotion is a necessary ingredient to almost all decisions.

See on linkedin.com

28
Gen
15

Choice Architecture by Richard H. Thaler, Cass R. Sunstein, John P. Balz :: SSRN

See on Scoop.itBounded Rationality and Beyond

Abstract:      
Decision makers do not make choices in a vacuum. They make them in an environment where many features, noticed and unnoticed, can influence their decisions. The person who creates that environment is, in our terminology, a choice architect. In this paper we analyze some of the tools that are available to choice architects. Our goal is to show how choice architecture can be used to help nudge people to make better choices (as judged by themselves) without forcing certain outcomes upon anyone, a philosophy we call libertarian paternalism. The tools we highlight are: defaults, expecting error, understanding mappings, giving feedback, structuring complex choices, and creating incentives.

See on papers.ssrn.com




Time is real? I think not

gennaio: 2015
L M M G V S D
« Dic   Feb »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Commenti recenti

Lorenzo Bosio su Un testo che trascende le sue…

Inserisci il tuo indirizzo e-mail per iscriverti a questo blog e ricevere notifiche di nuovi messaggi per e-mail.

Segui assieme ad altri 1.145 follower

Latest Tweets

Annunci

%d blogger hanno fatto clic su Mi Piace per questo: