Tradeoffs Between Price and Quality: How a Value Index Affects

The present research examines how the availability of information about the value of a product, expressed as a ratio of the quality received per dollar, influences preference formation. This index, similar to unit price which provides information about how much quantity is received per dollar, presents consumers with information regarding the quality received per dollar. An experiment that compares consumers' preferences inferred from a choice task with their preferences inferred from a conjoint task was conducted. In the choice task consumers selected the most attractive alternative from a set of options, while in the conjoint task the attractiveness of each option was rated. Consumers, presented with an index of quality received per dollar paid (the value index), are more likely to choose a lower priced, higher value option rather than a higher priced, higher quality option compared to consumers presented with only price and quality information. Clearly, how a consumer chooses to “get the best for his or her money” depends on the ease with which information about the choices can be processed.     

多传感器数据融合中基于目标识别的DS算法研究

由于多传感器数据中对目标的描述通常存在或多或少的模糊、相驳、遗缺等现象，在多传感器数据融合处理中如何对目标进行有效可靠的识别，是一个备受关注的难题。本文对多传感器数据融合处理中基于ＤＳ算法的目标识别问题进行了较深入的探讨，利用ＤＳ算法对不确定性信息的推理判断机制，为解决上述难题提供了一种有效的方法。     

Corporate Social Responsibility Through a Feminist Lens: Domestic Violence and the Workplace in the 21st Century

Domestic violence is a serious issue, and the costs for business of failing to address the impacts of domestic violence in the workplace are high. New technologies and economic shifts towards services sector industries are fast dissolving the boundaries between the workplace and the home in many national labor markets. Moreover, companies are now expected to meet higher standards of behavior in fulfilling their responsibilities to employees and wider society. These developments present challenges for ethical reasoning about the limits of employer responsibility in relation to domestic violence. While a number of possible approaches have something to contribute, this paper argues that feminist theories provide the most useful framework for ethical reasoning about the issues domestic violence raises for business organizations. The practical value of such reasoning is then illustrated by applying the organizing framework developed by Yuan et al. (J Bus Ethics 101:75—92, 2011) to examine how recurring domestic violence-related initiatives can be integrated as routine practices in firm operations. The paper thus provides a structured qualitative study of theory and practice for dealing with the impacts of domestic violence in the workplace.     

Multicriteria Portfolio Modeling for the Development of Shared Action Agendas

Organizations and collaborative networks set strategic directions by building agendas of action topics that will be implemented subject to limited resources and other constraints. The development of such agendas typically involves several decision makers and possibly other stakeholders who may have divergent views about how the topics contribute to multiple objectives. The processes of developing these agendas can be supported by methods of multicriteria decision analysis which allow the group members’ preferences to be systematically and transparently synthesized. In this paper, we extend methods of portfolio decision analysis with the aim of guiding the development of agendas in the presence of possibly incomplete information about the group members’ preferences and the impacts of the proposed topics. Specifically, we define performance measures that convey (i) what topics are favored by individual group members and (ii) how acceptable alternative portfolios of topic agendas are to the whole group. The methods are illustrated with data from a real case study for the development of a national research agenda on wood products in Finland.     

Measuring Investors’ Socially Responsible Preferences in Mutual Funds

The aim of this study is to analyze investor behavior towards socially responsible mutual funds. The analysis is based on an experimental study where a sample of individuals takes investment decisions under different parameters of information about the investment alternatives and expected returns. In the experiment, each participant decides how to distribute an investment budget between two funds, returns on which are uncertain and change over time. Two treatments are conducted, each providing a different degree of information on the socially responsible (SR) character of one of the two investment alternatives. The results obtained suggest that although individuals’ criteria for investment are essentially guided by returns and diversification, participants invest significantly more in a fund when they are explicitly informed about its SR nature. In particular, participants who declare being concerned about SR actually invest significantly more in the SR alternative. Furthermore, the level of SR faithfulness among a small group of investors is such that they invest the main share of their budget in the SR fund, even when the return differential is highly unfavorable. Providing clear information about the SR characteristics of an investment is crucial to help investors express their preferences.     

Group Structured Reasoning for Coalescing Group Decisions

In this paper we present the notion of structured reasoning through a model, called the Generic/Actual Argument Model (GAAM). The model which has been used as a computational representation for machine modelling of reasoning and for hybrid combinations of human and machine reasoning can be used as a coalescent framework for decision making. Whilst the notion of structuring reasoning is not new, structured reasoning is advanced as a technique where group consensus on reasoning structures at various levels can be used to facilitate the comprehension of complex reasoning particularly where there are multiple perspectives. For an issue, the approach provides a scaffolding structure for cognitive co-operation and a normative reasoning structure against which group participants can identify points of difference and points in common as well as the nature of the differences and similarities. Intra-group transparency characterized by the ability to recognise points in common and understand the nature of differences is important to the process of coalescing group decisions that carry maximum group support.     

Relevant or redundant: Elite consumers' perception of foreign-made products in an emerging market

Abstract

This paper examines the attitudes of elite Pakistani consumers concerning their preferences for foreign-made products and how these preferences influence purchasing decisions. Data were collected from a sample of 250 buyers using a mixed methodology consisting of focus groups and a questionnaire survey. The results show a link between the country of origin (COO) of products and purchasing decisions. The nature and extent of this link vary across product class and purchasing decisions. A means-end chain (MEC) analysis revealed a close link between consumers' liking for foreign products connected with how they valued those products both psychologically and physiologically. The findings have implications for attaining a competitive advantage by using marketing strategies to target elite customers. As a pioneering study, this paper advances the theoretical knowledge, providing a framework as well as specific guidelines for practitioners to conceptualise the COO construct. The paper also suggests a strategic direction that successfully targets the elite consumer segment in Pakistan.     

The moderating role of childhood socioeconomic status on the impact of nudging on the perceived threat of coronavirus and stockpiling intention

Communications that include nudges and framing strategies are ubiquitous in our daily lives. In this paper, we investigate how different nudging strategies during a public health campaign, particularly supplementary information and statistics, influence perceptions of threat and stockpiling intentions, while also considering the role of childhood socioeconomic status. Specifically, building upon prior work in behavioral economics, we hypothesize that the presence of additional statistics elicits lower perceived threat and intention to stockpile. In addition, we predict find that the childhood socioeconomic status of individuals influences these effects. Three studies offer evidence for those predictions and demonstrate the importance of message framing in uncertain circumstances. Overall, this work contributes to the literature on nudging and life history theory by investigating how communication strategies can be used to increase or decrease perceived threat in order to achieve desired outcomes (e.g., limiting stockpiling or respecting social distancing).     

Determinants of the Low SME Loan Approval Rate in Croatia

The paper proposes a new methodological framework for investigating consistency in loan assessment decisions and determinants of loan approval based on structural equation modelling and covariance structure analysis. We focus on a governmental SME loan programme in Croatia and investigate possible reasons for low loan approval rate that occurred in spite of interest rates subsidisation and sufficient supply of the loan funds. The novelty of the methodological approach taken is that it enables simultaneous investigation of the determinants of the loan approval and testing for consistency in the loan assessment decisions, which need not be assumed. We test several hypotheses about consistency in the loan approval decisions and lending preferences in Croatia. The empirical findings reject overall consistency of criteria but indicate a preference toward smaller loans. Among all SME loan requests, banks preferred smaller firms that requested smaller loans. The results suggest that individual banks differ in their criteria and in their loan-size preferences and that there is no positive correlation between the bank’s size and its loan-size preference.     

Strategic Behavior in Contested-Pile Methods for Fair Division of Indivisible Items

Most fair-division procedures are modeled on cake-cutting procedures such as “I cut, you choose”. The inputs are players’ choices, which are assumed to reflect preferences but not fully reveal them; the output is a division that is in some sense fair. However, it seems likely that decision makers sometimes behave insincerely, that is, they make choices that are not consistent with their true preferences. For example, strategic—as opposed to sincere—behavior may be aimed at taking advantage of information about an opponent’s preferences, which most fair-division procedures assume is not available. We focus on contested-pile procedures, a class of procedures for the fair division of indivisible items between two players, related to the alternation procedures proposed by Brams and Taylor (The win-win solution: guaranteeing fair shares to everybody. W. W. Norton, New York, 1999). We use computational models to assess the performance of these procedures under both sincere and strategic behavior. We show how available information about preferences can interact with strategy to shape outcomes. Our results indicate that strategic behavior, although it often changes outcomes, may not make them less efficient or less fair. Furthermore, our investigation suggests that how information about the opponents preference is processed does not have a strong impact, in that a conceptually simple strategy often outperforms a more elaborate one.     

An inquiry into pseudo‐legitimations: A framework to investigate the clash of managerial legitimations and employees' unfairness claims

Based on the argumentation theory of new rhetoric, this paper offers an analytical framework to facilitate empirical investigations on how managers in organizations handle unfairness claims. The proposed framework advocates a rhetorical approach that seeks to understand whether managers absolve themselves of unfairness accusations by pseudo‐legitimations. Pseudo‐legitimation is defined as an attempt to legitimate an action without any genuine reasoning. While the precision of formal deductive reasoning tends not to apply to moral disputes, rhetoric enables rational argumentation and the use of practical reasoning to achieve resolution. Therefore, if managerial judgments are genuine products of reasoning, managers' use of rhetoric to legitimate their actions should be respected in acknowledging value plurality within their boundaries of authority. By contrast, managerial legitimations that are based on irrational grounds should be disrespected, as they can lead to arbitrariness and abuse of power. Institutional dynamics may either permit or inhibit such uses of irrationality. Thus, the proposed framework should be considered alongside the perspective of rhetorical institutionalism.     

不完全信息下的企业并购

企业并购实质上是买卖双方在资本运营方面的博弈,由于现实生活中信息不对称的存在,并购交易成本加大,企业并购风险出现。因此,有必要以信息经济学理论为基础,从主并方的尽职调查即风险管理和目标企业价值评估两个方面着手,对不确定性带来的风险进行尽可能限度的防范和规避。     

旅游产品的信息性差异化模型

通过构建一个基于信息传递的旅游产品特征空间模型,将消费者偏好、二次运输成本、广告技术、规模经济、产品价格,以及旅游产品种类纳入一个统一的分析框架之中,重点研究了厂商通过广告强度寻求游客心理差异与上述各要素之间的变动关系。     

Mediation with Incomplete Information: Approaches to Suggest Potential Agreements

In bilateral Negotiation Analysis, the literature often considers the case of complete information. In this context, since the negotiators know the value functions of both parties, it is not difficult to calculate the Pareto efficient solutions for the negotiation. Thus rational negotiators can reach agreement on this frontier. However, these approaches are not applied in practice when complete information is not available. The research question of our work is “It is possible to help negotiators achieving an efficient solution in the absence of complete information regarding the different parameters of the model?”. We propose to derive incomplete information about the preferences of negotiators from the statements they make and the offers they exchange during the negotiation process. We present and discuss three approaches that use this information in order to help a mediator proposing a better solution than the compromise the negotiators have reached or are close to reach.     

Efficient Multi-Attribute Negotiation with Incomplete Information

Multi-attribute negotiation is an important mechanism for distributed decision makers to reach agreements in real-world situations. It allows the possibility of reaching “win-win” solutions for both parties, who trade off different attributes in a solution. Existing research on multi-attribute negotiations has mainly focused on the situations when negotiation parties have complete information about each other's preference. This paper presents a model with incomplete information, while considering Pareto-efficiency and computational efficiency. A non-biased mediator, who applies query learning to maintain near Pareto-efficiency without heavy computation, is adopted in the model. In addition, the mediating mechanism proposed in the model overcomes the difficulty of preference elicitation which usually arises in the preliminary step of a multi-attribute negotiation. Our model also reduces the negotiation complexity by decomposing the original n-dimensional negotiation space into a sequence of negotiation base lines. Agents can negotiate upon a base line with rather simple strategies. The experimental results show that near Pareto-efficient agreements can be reached effectively.     

Consumers' Decision-Making and Risk Perceptions Regarding Foods Produced with Biotechnology

This paper presents a basic framework for how people make decisions about products that may have been produced with biotechnology and examines how decision makers form their quantitative risk estimates. It also reviews several studies which argue that the acceptability to consumers of foods produced with the use of biotechnology is influenced not only by their perceptions about the magnitude of the risks involved, but also by the qualitative characteristics of the potential risks. The paper concludes with a suggested approach to enhancing communication between risk communicators and the public regarding the role of biotechnology in the food and other sectors.     

Tie the knot: building stronger consumers’ attachment toward a brand

Extant research has promoted the importance and seeking to establish a deeper understanding of brand loyalty. However, it still remains elusive and uncertain. A study with more than 1,500 CEOs worldwide believes that creating a bond with consumers and continuing to learn how to strengthen the bond are essential for realizing strategies and delivering on shareholder expectations. Not surprisingly, firms and researchers are seeking ways to build a stronger connection with consumers, because such attachment acts as a key requisite in a firm’s success. Consequently, understanding how marketers can intensify the attachment is important. This article offers a framework for building stronger consumers’ attachment and testing it based on a survey of 432 participants. Four factors are deemed to be important: ideal self-congruence, sensory experience, responsiveness, and CSR beliefs. Attachment influences loyalty and resilience to negative information. Additionally, attachment fully mediates ideal self-congruence and responsiveness to loyalty, as well as ideal self-congruence and sensory experience to resilience to negative information.     

基于语义推理的文本信息关联关系分析技术

重点论述了文本信息中的知识发现及潜在关联分析技术。采用本体建模技术、信息抽取技术以及知识库上的语义推理技术等来完成并实现文本信息的关联关系发现和分析,最后给出了语义关联分析技术在文本信息处理系统中的应用,并简要描述了系统的处理流程。在信息处理领域的大数据环境下,该技术有利于信息分析人员快速获取关联线索,辅助完成信息挖掘,为指挥决策提供更全面的信息支持。     

Experimental Strategies for Preference Information Acquisition: A Lattice Path Treatment

This paper investigates strategies for the acquisition of consumer preference information by a market researcher. Such preference information is obtained by the market researcher through an experimental process that entails polling consumers about their preference profiles with a view to completely specifying the preference order. In this paper, we limit the focus to one or two consumers.In this environment, the experiments are pairwise comparisons between resource bundles about which there is no a-priori preference information. Each such experiment can have three possible signals: one bundle is more preferred, indifferent, or less preferred over another. Choice of an experiment in the experimental sequence is important because different choices result in different average amounts of information.For the analysis the paper establishes a link between preference theory and lattice path counting. Combinatorial arguments that allow the market researcher to calculate quantities of information at the start of the information acquisition process are presented. A recursion for finding the impact of choosing different experiments on the average values of information gain is constructed. The paper studies how the experiments chosen subsequently can affect the elimination of other experiments from the experimental set and thus have an effect on the efficiency of information acquisition. The measures derived could be used by the market researcher as a benchmark with which to compare information gathering strategies.