According to the conjunction rule of probability theory, a conjunction of events cannot be more probable than either conjunct. However, participants often violate this rule in experimental settings, thus committing the conjunction fallacy. Why do participants commit this fallacy? One hypothesis suggests that participants interpret a task-critical statement designating the event A as designating the event A&notB. If so, participants do not commit the conjunction fallacy. Another hypothesis suggests that participants fail to take task-relevant relations of set inclusion into account when judging probabilities. Both hypotheses were tested in an experiment utilizing a between-subjects design with 145 participants. The results, analyzed using Bayes factors, provide evidence for the null hypothesis in both cases, thus suggesting that neither hypothesis explains the fallacy. However, the unexpectedly low prevalence of the fallacy in the baseline group may have masked the true effects of the manipulations.

No description available.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / The main objective of this investigation was to study the decision making process of wine companies and wine grape growers which belong to the Altos Montes Wine Producers Association (APROMONTES), to identify to what extend these participants are aligned in the adoption of innovations required to increase their market competitiveness. In this study we use as theoretical framework a combination of the prospect theory, the new evolutionary economics and the transition cost economics. Our theoretical contribution for the understanding of the decision making process in the adoption of innovations is constituted by the connection between the judgment heuristics and the concepts related to innovation which are influenced by the categories of analysis found in the transition cost economics. This research was based on the information collected through interviews with twelve wine companies associated to APROMONTES, twenty-five wine grape growers associated to these wine companies and also seven interviews with independent wine grape growers, trying to understand their decision making process in relation to their attempt to innovate in their production units. The analysis of the information collected shows the existence of decisions based on judgment heuristics which lead to unaligned decisions on the part of wine companies and wine grape growers, which make difficult the adoption of prescriptive innovations by the sector necessary to the increase of competitiveness in that production chain association. / O objetivo principal desta tese foi analisar o processo decisório de Viticultores e Vinicultores da Serra Gaúcha, mais especificamente da APROMONTES (Associação de Produtores dos Vinhos dos Altos Montes), no sentido de identificar em que medida esses participantes estão alinhados na adoção de inovações capazes de incrementar a competitividade da SAG Vitivinícola. Neste estudo, utilizamos como referencial teórico uma combinação entre a teoria da perspectiva, a nova economia evolucionária e a economia dos custos de transação. Nossa contribuição teórica para o entendimento do processo decisório para adoção de inovações se deu por meio do estabelecimento de conexões entre a utilização de heurísticas de julgamento e de conceitos ligados às inovações as quais são influenciadas por categorias de análise contempladas na economia dos custos de transação. Esta pesquisa se apoiou em informações levantadas através de entrevistas realizadas com doze vinícolas integrantes da APROMONTES, de vinte e cinco entrevistas com viticultores ligados a essas vinícolas e de sete entrevistas com viticultores independentes, buscando entender o processo decisório desses no que diz respeito à decisão de inovarem em suas unidades de produção. A apreciação das informações levantadas evidencia a existência de decisões baseadas em heurísticas de julgamento que conduzem a decisões desalinhadas por parte de vinícolas e viticultores, o que dificulta a adoção de inovações prescritas como necessárias para o aumento da competitividade daquelas cadeias de produção.

The credibility of the American news media is increasingly under fire. Despite an exponential expansion of information available in the digital media era, increased political news coverage and commentary has brought growing apprehension over how much of today’s news can be trusted and believed. 24-hour cable news channels are among the media most often subject to this criticism. At the same time, the media operates under First Amendment freedom of press protection, a constitutional guarantee granted with the understanding that democracy can only succeed when its citizens are well informed. In the great experiment of our republic, a freely functioning news media fills this critical role, but only to the extent that it can be trusted to portray the truth. This research questioned the media’s ability to inform the public due to the proliferation of political news and commentary. Utilizing social judgment theory, this study offered two hypotheses: that news consumers will find more credibility in political news when presented by media outlets they favor due to political preferences, and that they will also find more credibility in non-political news when presented by media they favor due to political preferences. The study examined if there is a bleed over effect on the credibility of non-political news due to political news coverage. An experiment was conducted in which two politically diverse populations, Republicans and Democrats, where asked to rate the credibility of six stories. Three of the stories were political, three non-political. While the content of those stories remained constant for all study participants, the media brands associated with the stories alternated between Fox News and CNN to determine if the media source alone influences perceptions of credibility. Results from members of both political parties provided support for each hypothesis. Republicans assigned greater credibility to both political and non-political news stories when presented by their network of preference, Fox News. By comparison, Democrats demonstrated greater trust when those same stories where branded by their preferred network, CNN.

The thesis contributes to the ongoing discussion pertaining the concept of due managerial care and the business judgment rule in Czech law and aims to explore the aforementioned in the context of acquisition transactions, in the context of purchase of a business share or an enterprise (or a part of an enterprise) as the issue of acquisition transactions, despite its substantial practical impact, remain largely out of scientific focus. Specifically, the thesis explores the possibility of articulation of the standard of due managerial care for the purpose of acquisition transaction and, if such articulation is possible, its specific features. In its exploration, the thesis focuses on articulation of the above standard in the context of availability of information regarding the target company or enterprise, which commonly takes form of a due diligence. The author aims to define the above standard upon comparison of Czech concept of due managerial care and business judgment rule with its German counterparts. Thus, the thesis also addresses the issue to what extent it is permissible to transfer and subsequently use the findings from the German standard of due managerial care in the context of Czech law. Following the initial comparison of the regulation of due managerial care and business judgment rule...

The aim of this thesis is to deepen the understanding about the function of control in the inspection process and to increase the knowledge about the legitimacy and impact from inspection on different types of social and welfare services. In the thesis the form and legitimacy of the inspection process are studied in two types of social services in Sweden: a less complex service where the task to investigate and make decisions about social care dominates (IAD), and a more complex service where the task to provide treatment interventions dominates (TI). The data consists of policy documents, inspection reports, casefile documentation, and interviews with inspectors, politicians, managers and social workers. The inspection process is discussed in relation to theories about control systems and legitimacy processes. Inspection is a policy instrument whose standards are derived from legislations and where those subject to the inspection are obliged to meet the demands made by the inspectorates. This form of disciplinary control has been questioned given that its complexity makes it hard to regulate the practice of social work through detailed rules. By including a less disciplinary form of control the instrument’s ability to impact on more complex aspects of social services are expected to increase. The results show a difference in how the inspection process is set up in the two types of services. In the IAD services the process takes the form of a disciplinary control system, whereas the process in TI services initially takes the form of a non-disciplinary system. In spite of the differences observed in the initial stages of the process, the results show that the judgments of inspectors in both types of services are almost exclusively based on information about concrete and detailed aspects. This entails that the judgements of inspectors in both types of services mostly take the form of statements on simple observable and concrete conditions, whereas judgments about more complex aspects are rarely made. The study also shows that although the propriety and relevance of the inspectors’ judgements are questioned more in TI organisations inspections seem to have greater validity and impact on TI than on IAD organisations. The results of the thesis point to two explanations. One explanation is that the costs of dealing with the problems underlying the identified deficiencies are lower for TI than IAD organisations. This in turn leads to greater acceptance of carrying out the proposed measures in TI than in IAD organisations. Another possible explanation is that the potential sanctions are greater for TI than IAD organisations.

Introduktion: Tidigare studier har visat att intressenters förväntningar på revisionen skiljer sig från revisorernas och att ett förväntningsgap existerar. Bland de tidigare studierna som behandlar förväntningsgapet är forskningen kring revisorns väsentlighetsbedömning ytterst begränsad. Vi har inte funnit någon tidigare forskning där fokus legat på att förklara intressenters upplevda kännedom och faktiska kunskap kring ämnet, varför en sådan studie kan anses relevant att genomföra. Syfte: Syftet med denna studie är att förklara intressenters upplevda kännedom och faktiska kunskap kring revisorers väsentlighetsbedömningar. Metod: Studien utgår från en kvantitativ forskningsstrategi och en deduktiv ansats. En tvärsnittsdesign har använts och empiri har samlats in från kreditgivare, ekonomichefer och ekonomistudenter med hjälp av en enkätundersökning. Slutsats: Studiens resultat visar att det finns faktorer som kan förklara intressenters upplevda kännedom och faktiska kunskap, men att dessa två skiljer sig åt. Den enda faktorn som visar ett samband med både kännedom och kunskap är erfarenhet inom revision. / Introduction: Previous studies has shown that expectations on audit differ between stakeholders and auditors, and that expectation gap exists. Among the previous studies examining the expectation gap, there’s limited research on auditors’ materiality judgements. We have not found any previous research whose focus have been on explaining stakeholders’ familiarity and knowledge regarding the subject, justifying the relevance for such a study. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explain stakeholders’ perceived familiarity and actual knowledge regarding auditors’ materiality judgments. Method: The study is based on a quantitative research design and a deductive approach. A cross-sectional design has been used and data from creditors, CFO’s and business students was gathered through a survey. Conclusion: The results show that there are some factors that can explain stakeholders’ perceived familiarity and actual knowledge, but it exists differences between them. The only factor that shows a relationship with both familiarity and knowledge is experience from audit.

The purpose of this study was to observe and analyze the process of regional climate adaptation planning and the role of stakeholder deliberation in decision making about adaptation actions. It employed a case study approach based on one of three total study sites of an international, multidisciplinary grant titled, “METROPOLE: An Integrated Framework to Analyze Local Decision Making and Adaptive Capacity to Large-Scale Environmental Change”. The purpose of the case study of this project was to analyze stakeholder deliberation at two workshops at the grant’s Broward County, Florida site regarding two adaptation options: elevation/floodproofing and voluntary buyouts. Analyzing stakeholder deliberation about these two options allowed for the identification of specific barriers to adaptation for stakeholders in this region. These barriers were then used to suggest values regarding adaptation priorities and planning. The primary idea driving this project was that deliberation provides a pragmatic approach to determining stakeholder values and preferences – which ought to be used to inform planning and decision making about climate policy. The ultimate goal of this project was to demonstrate how the rhetorical concepts of situated judgment, persuasion, and deliberation can be applied in adaptation planning processes and therefore, how applied rhetoric contributes to the production of “usable” science, or science that takes decision makers’ preferences and needs into account when making policy decisions. The problem that this project responds to involves three interrelated parts: framing, communication, and policymaking. Currently, climate change framing in the US is largely characterized by “debate” and emphasizes only one aspect of the climate change problem: cause. The second part of the problem pertains to communication and in particular, the way in which scientific and economic data about climate change/adaptation is typically delivered to non-scientific audiences. The third part of the problem as it is addressed in this project pertains to policymaking, or what enables or prevents progress toward effective policymaking. Data collected for this project include: surveys, 10 in-depth interviews, and field notes. The first layer of analysis was facilitated through Decision Explorer, a qualitative software commonly used in strategic management and decision sciences. For this project, Decision Explorer was used to cognitively map and analyze data from the 10 in-depth interviews. The second layer of analysis used NVivo, a qualitative coding software, to organize and code data collected from all sources. The findings of this project concluded that for stakeholders in this region, the four primary barriers to adaptation were: leadership, resources, invisibility/timing, and the limitations of modeling processes. Stakeholders’ primary values about climate adaptation reflected their strong sense of place attachment. These values were expressed in terms of altruistic values, or concerns about how the local implications of climate may affect humans (e.g., how vulnerably located critical infrastructure and weakening transportation infrastructure will affect citizens’ safety and community resilience) and “scientific” values, such as the inclusion of regional scientific factors in climate modeling and adaptation planning. One of the most significant contributions of this project was the development of an approach that leverages the application of rhetorical concepts in science policy planning/decision making. This unique strategy embedded the rhetorical components of deliberation, situated judgment, phronesis and persuasion within the three framing tasks of collective action framing (i.e., diagnostic, prognostic and motivational framing) to illustrate a unique approach for engaging stakeholders in adaptation planning. More broadly, this project responded to calls for social science research to provide useful recommendations about how to facilitate more effective stakeholder engagement and communication about climate adaptation planning and policy.

A partir de l’articulation entre le bien-être comparable inter-personnellement et l’équité basée sur la séparation des personnes, la thèse présente un cadre théorique dans lequel les préférences éthiques sont représentées par des fonctions de bien-être social additivement séparables. Nous avons deux objectifs ; en décelant les jugements distributifs nécessairement sous-tendus par les fonctions qui respectent des principes de transferts de revenus, le premier objectif est d’offrir des critères de comparaison entre ces fonctions et celles qui respectent les principes de transferts d’utilité (fonctions prioritaristes). Le second objectif est d’exposer la pluralité des jugements distributifs et des degrés d’adhésion qu’ils peuvent susciter. A ces fins, il faut postuler la comparabilité de l’utilité et des valeurs éthiques (utilités transformées). Cette comparabilité à deux niveaux est postulée lorsque les ratios d’utilité entre ménages aux besoins différents sont supposés comparables. Dans ce cadre, les fonctions de bien-être social qui respectent le principe de transferts de revenus de Pigou-Dalton ne sont pas forcément prioritaristes. De plus, les fonctions défendent potentiellement deux définitions du degré d’adhésion à l’aversion aux inégalités. Premièrement, une fonction qui tolère une perte d’utilité totale plus grande afin de réduire les inégalités est dite plus averse aux inégalités. Cette définition est caractérisée par les principes de transferts proportionnels qui s’adaptent bien à la comparabilité en ratios d’utilité. Deuxièmement, le degré d’adhésion est présenté par l’aversion plus forte aux inégalités entre les moins bien lotis. Les hypothèses informationnelles entravent l’exposé des degrés d’adhésion selon la seconde définition, elles limitent aussi les jugements distributifs. En passant outre, nous étudions les interactions entre un nombre quelconque de principes de transferts d’utilité et de revenus définis de manière récursive. Enfin, quatre jugements distributifs sont caractérisés par le respect et/ou le non-respect d’un ensemble de principes de transferts. La disposition à négliger l’évolution de bien-être d’une fraction donnée de la population au profit de l’évolution de bien-être d’une minorité d’individus représente le degré d’adhésion à l’un de ces jugements. / From the linkage between interpersonally comparable well-being and equity based on the separateness of persons, the Ph. D. dissertation introduces a theoretical framework in which ethical preferences are represented by additively separable social welfare functions. The thesis has two goals ; by exhibiting distributive judgments necessarily embodied by the functions that fulfil income transfer principles, the first aim is to provide comparison cirteria between these functions and those that fulfill utility transfer principles (prioritarian functions). The second aim is to expose a plurality of distributive judgments and of degrees of adhesion they can rise. For such purposes, interpersonal comparability of utility as well as that of ethical values (transformed utilities) are needed. This two-level comparability is granted when inter-household utility ratios are supposed to be comparable. In this framework, the social welfare functions satisfying the Pigou-Dalton principle of income transfer are not necessarily prioritarian. Moreover, the functions potentially support two meanings of adhesion for inequality aversion. First, if a function is willing to endorse a inequality-reducing transfer entailing a greater loss in the transferred benefit to be socially desirable, then it is more inequality averse. This definition is characterized by proportional transfer principles well-adapted to ratio-scale comparability of utility. Second, the degree of adhesion for inequality aversion is presented as a downside inequality aversion. Informational hypothesis rule out parts of the exposition of the plurality of degrees, they put limits to distributive judgments too. By going beyond that, the Ph. D. dissertation studies the interplay between any number of income and utility transfer principles all defined recursively. Finally, four distributive judgments are characterized by the fulfilment and/or non-fulfilment of a set of transfer principles. The willingness to neglect the welfare evolution of a given proportion of population to take into account that of a minority represents the degree of adhesion for one of those judgments.

No description available.