Pub Date : 2018-12-15DOI: 10.7206//DEC.1733-0092.113
Leah Dodell
This paper revisits one of the most debated tales from the Old Testament, Jacob’s deception of his father Isaac, and models it in the framework of a Bayesian game. Solving for the equilibrium that occurs in the Torah reveals what conditions must hold for biblical characters to be willing to make the decisions that they make. The paper also examines how the protagonists’ decisions would have changed if they had held different values. The analysis sheds light on which interpretations of the biblical story hold the most weight when its characters maintain consistent beliefs and act upon them in a sequentially rational manner.
{"title":"A Bayesian Blessing: A Biblical Decision Explained by Game Theory","authors":"Leah Dodell","doi":"10.7206//DEC.1733-0092.113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206//DEC.1733-0092.113","url":null,"abstract":"This paper revisits one of the most debated tales from the Old Testament, Jacob’s deception of his father Isaac, and models it in the framework of a Bayesian game. Solving for the equilibrium that occurs in the Torah reveals what conditions must hold for biblical characters to be willing to make the decisions that they make. The paper also examines how the protagonists’ decisions would have changed if they had held different values. The analysis sheds light on which interpretations of the biblical story hold the most weight when its characters maintain consistent beliefs and act upon them in a sequentially rational manner.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47083278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-15DOI: 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.114
M. Kaminski
The article examines the decision-making components of Jane Austen’s six major novels as reconstructed in Michael Chwe’s book and his argument that Austen was a precursor of game theory. In her novels, Austen describes an abundance of strategic situations in the mating process within the British higher classes. Social constraints made mating within this world a tough game due to harsh punishments for failure, especially for women, and severe limitation on signaling interest or sympathy. Austen cleverly investigates this environment and reconstructs many aspects of strategic behavior that have their counterparts in formal concepts of game and decision theory. While she hasn’t made contributions to theory per se, she deserves being named a precursor of applied strategic thinking and an expert on a particular strategically sophisticated social environment.
{"title":"Some Thoughts on Michael Chwe’s „Jane Austen, Applied Game Theorist”","authors":"M. Kaminski","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.114","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the decision-making components of Jane Austen’s six major novels as reconstructed in Michael Chwe’s book and his argument that Austen was a precursor of game theory. In her novels, Austen describes an abundance of strategic situations in the mating process within the British higher classes. Social constraints made mating within this world a tough game due to harsh punishments for failure, especially for women, and severe limitation on signaling interest or sympathy. Austen cleverly investigates this environment and reconstructs many aspects of strategic behavior that have their counterparts in formal concepts of game and decision theory. While she hasn’t made contributions to theory per se, she deserves being named a precursor of applied strategic thinking and an expert on a particular strategically sophisticated social environment.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47125820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-15DOI: 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.112
M. Stefaniak, R. Urbaniak
Legal Probabilism is the view that mathematics, and probability theory in particular, can be used to explicate the standard of legal decisions. While probabilistic tools are sometimes used in courtrooms, the construction of a general model of evidence evaluation remains a challenge. Conceptual difficulties facing Legal Probabilism include the difficulty about conjunction, the difficulty about corroboration and the gatecrasher paradox. These problems need to be addressed before we construct a general model. In this survey we discuss the three difficulties and present some theories proposed as their solutions.
{"title":"Varieties of Legal Probabilism: A Survey","authors":"M. Stefaniak, R. Urbaniak","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.112","url":null,"abstract":"Legal Probabilism is the view that mathematics, and probability theory in particular, can be used to explicate the standard of legal decisions. While probabilistic tools are sometimes used in courtrooms, the construction of a general model of evidence evaluation remains a challenge. Conceptual difficulties facing Legal Probabilism include the difficulty about conjunction, the difficulty about corroboration and the gatecrasher paradox. These problems need to be addressed before we construct a general model. In this survey we discuss the three difficulties and present some theories proposed as their solutions.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48805957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-15DOI: 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.102
A. Wojtowicz
Empirical data suggest, that in many situations people are not able to estimate the probability of events on the base of available information in a way consistent with the normative model. This fact infl uences the choice of conclusions which are considered to be rational. The article outlines the factors that may affect the assumed value of a priori probability and – indirectly – the value of a posteriori probability. All these factors will be collectively referred to as the parameter j. Its value depends on the context in which the reasoning is made. In the article I show, that a critical assessment of our reasoning is not always justified.
{"title":"Jakie wnioski uznajemy za racjonalne? Wpływ prawdopodobieństwa apriorycznego na prawdopodobieństwo aposterioryczne","authors":"A. Wojtowicz","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.102","url":null,"abstract":"Empirical data suggest, that in many situations people are not able to estimate the probability of events on the base of available information in a way consistent with the normative model. This fact infl uences the choice of conclusions which are considered to be rational. The article outlines the factors that may affect the assumed value of a priori probability and – indirectly – the value of a posteriori probability. All these factors will be collectively referred to as the parameter j. Its value depends on the context in which the reasoning is made. In the article I show, that a critical assessment of our reasoning is not always justified.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47430958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-15DOI: 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.103
Radosław Zyzik
The aim of the paper is to critically assess the economic decisionmaking model in criminal law from the perspective of empirical legal studies and behavioral analysis of law. In the second half of the XX century the economic theory of punishment had dominant infl uence on criminal law policy in US. At the beginning of XXI century numerous statistical studies have shown limited effectiveness of the economic approach and harmful effects of the large number of prisoners currently being incarcerated. Therefore the new model of decision-making in criminal law was needed. Psychologists, behavioral economists and proponents of behavioral analysis of law were able to identify factors infl uencing decisions of criminals including hyperbolic discounting, optimism bias and affective forecasting.
{"title":"Mit racjonalnego łotra. Statystyka i psychologia kontra ekonomiczna analiza prawa","authors":"Radosław Zyzik","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.103","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the paper is to critically assess the economic decisionmaking model in criminal law from the perspective of empirical legal studies and behavioral analysis of law. In the second half of the XX century the economic theory of punishment had dominant infl uence on criminal law policy in US. At the beginning of XXI century numerous statistical studies have shown limited effectiveness of the economic approach and harmful effects of the large number of prisoners currently being incarcerated. Therefore the new model of decision-making in criminal law was needed. Psychologists, behavioral economists and proponents of behavioral analysis of law were able to identify factors infl uencing decisions of criminals including hyperbolic discounting, optimism bias and affective forecasting.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45340423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-15DOI: 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.104
Marcin Czupryna, E. Kubińska, Łukasz Markiewicz
In this paper, we consider the illusion of control by using Bayesian updating as the rationality model. Our paper contributes twofold. First, we empirically verify that the illusion of control may have two concurrent sources, “emotional” and “rational”. The fi rst one produces biased Bayesian processing due to emotional engagement and the second one yields biases due to prior assumptions on the level of control. Second, we propose a method for identifying these two sources. Moreover we verified two hypotheses H1: The emotional factor causes overestimation of the actual level of control. and H2: The rational factor is responsible for the reverse relationship between observed levels of the illusion of control in three separate situations, when subjects have significant control, moderate or no control. Only the hypothesis H2 received partial empirical support.
{"title":"Can conjugate prior probability explain the illusion of control?","authors":"Marcin Czupryna, E. Kubińska, Łukasz Markiewicz","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.104","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we consider the illusion of control by using Bayesian updating as the rationality model. Our paper contributes twofold. First, we empirically verify that the illusion of control may have two concurrent sources, “emotional” and “rational”. The fi rst one produces biased Bayesian processing due to emotional engagement and the second one yields biases due to prior assumptions on the level of control. Second, we propose a method for identifying these two sources. Moreover we verified two hypotheses H1: The emotional factor causes overestimation of the actual level of control. and H2: The rational factor is responsible for the reverse relationship between observed levels of the illusion of control in three separate situations, when subjects have significant control, moderate or no control. Only the hypothesis H2 received partial empirical support.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46715527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-15DOI: 10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.105
A. Matel, T. Poskrobko
In surveys, which are a commonly accepted research method in social sciences, we always observe a certain percentage of respondents giving no-opinion responses such as “no opinion” or “hard to say”. In this study, we treat no-opinion responses as a motivated decision to refuse to respond. The aim of the study was to determine what factors involved in the organisation of a study increase the percentage of respondents who opt for no-opinion responses. The factors on which we focused include in particular the significance of the difficulty of questions; the order of questionnaire questions; motivating respondents through rewards, and the research technique. In the first part of the study, 575 students were divided into 5 groups. Each group was surveyed about environmental consumer attitudes in different survey conditions. In addition, the respondents were asked to rank the difficulty of individual questions in the survey. Findings: The study showed that the percentage of no-opinion responses increases as the questions become more difficult. The respondents were more likely to avoid stating their opinion on those unecological behaviours that they exhibited more frequently. The change of the research technique from a questionnaire to a direct interview caused a decrease in the percentage of noopinion responses. The respondents opted for a “no opinion” response less frequently when the interview was conducted by a lecturer than when it was conducted by a student. Changing the order of questions also affected the percentage of no-opinion responses; however, that was only true for questions that the respondents recognised as easy. Conclusions: The study showed that the choice of a research technique intended to reduce the percentage of no-opinion responses depends on the quality of questions. If they are difficult and require the respondents to engage cognitive resources, a better solution is to employ the direct interview method. However, if the questions are sensitive and the respondent may feel pressure to give a response that conforms to social norms, a better solution is to ensure them anonymity, e.g. by employing the questionnaire technique.
{"title":"Why respondents select no-opinion response option in consumer research?","authors":"A. Matel, T. Poskrobko","doi":"10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.105","url":null,"abstract":"In surveys, which are a commonly accepted research method in social sciences, we always observe a certain percentage of respondents giving no-opinion responses such as “no opinion” or “hard to say”. In this study, we treat no-opinion responses as a motivated decision to refuse to respond. The aim of the study was to determine what factors involved in the organisation of a study increase the percentage of respondents who opt for no-opinion responses. The factors on which we focused include in particular the significance of the difficulty of questions; the order of questionnaire questions; motivating respondents through rewards, and the research technique. In the first part of the study, 575 students were divided into 5 groups. Each group was surveyed about environmental consumer attitudes in different survey conditions. In addition, the respondents were asked to rank the difficulty of individual questions in the survey. Findings: The study showed that the percentage of no-opinion responses increases as the questions become more difficult. The respondents were more likely to avoid stating their opinion on those unecological behaviours that they exhibited more frequently. The change of the research technique from a questionnaire to a direct interview caused a decrease in the percentage of noopinion responses. The respondents opted for a “no opinion” response less frequently when the interview was conducted by a lecturer than when it was conducted by a student. Changing the order of questions also affected the percentage of no-opinion responses; however, that was only true for questions that the respondents recognised as easy. Conclusions: The study showed that the choice of a research technique intended to reduce the percentage of no-opinion responses depends on the quality of questions. If they are difficult and require the respondents to engage cognitive resources, a better solution is to employ the direct interview method. However, if the questions are sensitive and the respondent may feel pressure to give a response that conforms to social norms, a better solution is to ensure them anonymity, e.g. by employing the questionnaire technique.","PeriodicalId":37255,"journal":{"name":"Decyzje","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42655042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：