|
|
Showing 1 - 5 of
5 matches in All Departments
This volume is the result of a conference held at the University of
California, Irvine, on the topics that provide its title -- choice,
decision, and measurement. The conference was planned, and the
volume prepared, in honor of Professor R. Duncan Luce on his 70th
birthday. Following a short autobiographical statement by Luce, the
volume is organized into four topics, to each of which Luce has
made significant contributions. The book provides an overview of
current issues in each area and presents some of the best recent
theoretical and empirical work. Personal reflections on Luce and
his work begin each section. These reflections were written by
outstanding senior researchers: Peter Fishburn (Preference and
Decision Making), Patrick Suppes (Measurement Theory and Axiomatic
Systems), William J. McGill (Psychophysics and Reaction Time), and
W.K. Estes (Choice, Identification and Categorization). The first
section presents recent theoretical and empirical work on
descriptive models of decision making, and theoretical results on
general probabilistic models of choice and ranking. Luce's recent
theoretical and empirical work on rank- and sign-dependent utility
theory is important in many of these contributions. The second
section presents results from psychophysics, probabilistic
measurement, aggregation of expert opinion, and test theory. The
third section presents various process oriented models, with
supportive data, for tasks such as redundant signal detection,
forced choice, and absolute identification. The final section
contains theory and data on categorization and attention, and
general theoretical results for developing and testing models in
these domains.
Behavioral Social Choice looks at the probabilistic foundations of
collective decision-making rules. The authors challenge much of the
existing theoretical wisdom about social choice processes, and seek
to restore faith in the possibility of democratic decision-making.
In particular, they argue that worries about the supposed
prevalence of majority rule cycles that would preclude groups from
reaching a final decision about what alternative they prefer have
been greatly overstated. In practice, majority rule can be expected
to work well in most real-world settings. Furthermore, if there is
a problem, they show that the problem is more likely to be one of
sample estimates missing the majority winner in a close contest
(e.g., Bush-Gore) than a problem about cycling. The authors also
provide new mathematical tools to estimate the prevalence of cycles
as a function of sample size and insights into how alternative
model specifications can change our estimates of social orderings.
This volume is the result of a conference held at the University of
California, Irvine, on the topics that provide its title -- choice,
decision, and measurement. The conference was planned, and the
volume prepared, in honor of Professor R. Duncan Luce on his 70th
birthday. Following a short autobiographical statement by Luce, the
volume is organized into four topics, to each of which Luce has
made significant contributions.
The book provides an overview of current issues in each area and
presents some of the best recent theoretical and empirical work.
Personal reflections on Luce and his work begin each section. These
reflections were written by outstanding senior researchers: Peter
Fishburn (Preference and Decision Making), Patrick Suppes
(Measurement Theory and Axiomatic Systems), William J. McGill
(Psychophysics and Reaction Time), and W.K. Estes (Choice,
Identification and Categorization).
The first section presents recent theoretical and empirical work
on descriptive models of decision making, and theoretical results
on general probabilistic models of choice and ranking. Luce's
recent theoretical and empirical work on rank- and sign-dependent
utility theory is important in many of these contributions. The
second section presents results from psychophysics, probabilistic
measurement, aggregation of expert opinion, and test theory. The
third section presents various process oriented models, with
supportive data, for tasks such as redundant signal detection,
forced choice, and absolute identification. The final section
contains theory and data on categorization and attention, and
general theoretical results for developing and testing models in
these domains.
Behavioral Social Choice looks at the probabilistic foundations of
collective decision-making rules. The authors challenge much of the
existing theoretical wisdom about social choice processes, and seek
to restore faith in the possibility of democratic decision-making.
In particular, they argue that worries about the supposed
prevalence of majority rule cycles that would preclude groups from
reaching a final decision about what alternative they prefer have
been greatly overstated. In practice, majority rule can be expected
to work well in most real-world settings. Furthermore, if there is
a problem, they show that the problem is more likely to be one of
sample estimates missing the majority winner in a close contest
(e.g., Bush-Gore) than a problem about cycling. The authors also
provide new mathematical tools to estimate the prevalence of cycles
as a function of sample size and insights into how alternative
model specifications can change our estimates of social orderings.
Best-worst scaling (BWS) is an extension of the method of paired
comparison to multiple choices that asks participants to choose
both the most and the least attractive options or features from a
set of choices. It is an increasingly popular way for academics and
practitioners in social science, business, and other disciplines to
study and model choice. This book provides an authoritative and
systematic treatment of best-worst scaling, introducing readers to
the theory and methods for three broad classes of applications. It
uses a variety of case studies to illustrate simple but reliable
ways to design, implement, apply, and analyze choice data in
specific contexts, and showcases the wide range of potential
applications across many different disciplines. Best-worst scaling
avoids many rating scale problems and will appeal to those wanting
to measure subjective quantities with known measurement properties
that can be easily interpreted and applied.
|
|