At 08:23 AM 1/24/2007, Maarten Sierhuis wrote:
Goal-based activities
:-)
Doei ... MXS
On Jan 24, 2007, at 5:40 AM, Alan Penn wrote:
As with all binary divides there
is a real risk that I am missing an alternative and much more persuasive
position that somehow manages to achieve the best of both worlds - can
anyone tell me what it would be?
Within the decision psychology literature, Beach and Mitchell's
Image Theory (1996) could also provide a useful framework. Image Theory
assumes that decision makers use three different schematic knowledge
structures to organize their thinking about decisions.
- Value images consist of the decision maker's principles (criteria for
rightness or wrongness.)
- Trajectory images consist of previously adopted goals and convey the
decision maker's vision of the ideal future.
- Strategic images are the various plans which have been adopted for
achieving the goals on the trajectory image.
The strategy selected for a particular decision making task depends on
three variables:
- Choice characteristics (e.g., choice unfamiliarity, ambiguity,
complexity, and instability)
- Environment characteristics (e.g., irreversability, whether choice
may be made iteratively/incrementally, significance, accountability for
unacceptable outcomes, and time/money constraints)
- Decision maker characteristics (e.g., knowledge of different choice
strategies; ability to use strategies; motivation to spend the minimum
time, effort, and money while still making an acceptable choice.)
Image Theory makes certain observations about how human agents use
information to arrive at decisions. In particular, option screening and
choice selection are distinctly different cognitive processes with
different information requirements. Experimental studies indicate that
information used in option screening is seldom reused during final
choice. In one study (Beach & Strom, 1989) subjects were asked to
screen apartments; once they had selected a finalist, they were informed
that their selected choice was no longer available. Subjects
overwhelmingly preferred to start all over with an entirely new set of
options rather than rescreen the previously rejected options.
This points up another risk of the etic perspective: constructing agents
that are too rational!
-----
Brent Zenobia
Instructor
Dept. of Engineering and Technology Management
Portland State University