IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eurjdp/v7y2019i1d10.1007_s40070-018-0092-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choice-making and choose-ables: making decision agents more human and choosy

Author

Listed:
  • Lorraine Dodd

    (Cranfield University, Defence Academy of the UK)

Abstract

This paper discusses concepts that might shape, extend, limit or re-focus an agent’s set of options that can then be thought of as that particular agent’s potential in terms of their ways forward and degrees of freedom. Because there is no unambiguous word that conveys the meaning of this higher order concept of choice-making, the term “choose-able” has been adopted in order to distinguish it from the usual decision concepts known as choice or option. An agent’s choose-ables are defined as the imagined deemed possible ways forward, that the agent has to construct, compose or create before they can choose. The central concept of a choose-able is a very powerful one if only it could be surfaced and made explicit. It is often only possible to make inferences about the nature of choose-ables after observing the actions taken once a choice has been made. Drama theory formally develops this kind of inferencing and provided a foundation for this paper as it explores the relational realms of options. The paper presents a funnelling construct and then draws together Catastrophe theory and Culture theory to offer new ways of analysing the shaping effects of relational contexts on an agent’s choose-ables that then act as a medium through which agents are drawn to make choices and carry out observable actions. The strength of the combination of the theories lies in their descriptive power of subjective, relational concepts that hitherto have tended to remain hidden and tacit.

Suggested Citation

  • Lorraine Dodd, 2019. "Choice-making and choose-ables: making decision agents more human and choosy," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(1), pages 101-115, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eurjdp:v:7:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s40070-018-0092-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s40070-018-0092-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40070-018-0092-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40070-018-0092-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tina Balke & Nigel Gilbert, 2014. "How Do Agents Make Decisions? A Survey," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 17(4), pages 1-13.
    2. Smith, J. Q. & Harrison, P. J. & Zeeman, E. C., 1981. "The analysis of some discontinuous decision processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 30-43, May.
    3. Jim Q. Smith & Lorraine Dodd, 2012. "Regulating Autonomous Agents Facing Conflicting Objectives: A Command and Control Example," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 165-171, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cristiano CODAGNONE & Giovanni LIVA & Egidijus BARCEVICIUS & Gianluca MISURACA & Luka KLIMAVICIUTE & Michele BENEDETTI & Irene VANINI & Giancarlo VECCHI & Emily RYEN GLOINSON & Katherine STEWART & Sti, 2020. "Assessing the impacts of digital government transformation in the EU: Conceptual framework and empirical case studies," JRC Research Reports JRC120865, Joint Research Centre.
    2. repec:zbw:bofrdp:1990_011 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. L Dodd & J Moffat & J Smith, 2006. "Discontinuity in decision-making when objectives conflict: a military command decision case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(6), pages 643-654, June.
    4. Huber, Robert & Bakker, Martha & Balmann, Alfons & Berger, Thomas & Bithell, Mike & Brown, Calum & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Xiong, Hang & Le, Quang Bao & Mack, Gabriele & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Millingt, 2018. "Representation of decision-making in European agricultural agent-based models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 143-160.
    5. Jim Q. Smith & Lorraine Dodd, 2012. "Regulating Autonomous Agents Facing Conflicting Objectives: A Command and Control Example," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 165-171, June.
    6. Noeldeke, Beatrice & Winter, Etti & Ntawuhiganayo, Elisée Bahati, 2022. "Representing human decision-making in agent-based simulation models: Agroforestry adoption in rural Rwanda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    7. Hazel Squires & Michael P. Kelly & Nigel Gilbert & Falko Sniehotta & Robin C. Purshouse, 2023. "The long‐term effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of public health interventions; how can we model behavior? A review," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(12), pages 2836-2854, December.
    8. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    9. María Elena Orduña Alegría & Niels Schütze & Samuel C. Zipper, 2020. "A Serious Board Game to Analyze Socio-Ecological Dynamics towards Collaboration in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, June.
    10. David Anzola & Peter Barbrook-Johnson & Juan I. Cano, 2017. "Self-organization and social science," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 221-257, June.
    11. Jason R. W. Merrick & Fabrizio Ruggeri & Refik Soyer & L. Robin Keller, 2012. "From the Editors---Games and Decisions in Reliability and Risk," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 81-85, June.
    12. Ida Nadia S. Djenontin & Leo C. Zulu & Arika Ligmann-Zielinska, 2020. "Improving Representation of Decision Rules in LUCC-ABM: An Example with an Elicitation of Farmers’ Decision Making for Landscape Restoration in Central Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-35, July.
    13. Gianluca Misuraca & Luigi Geppert & Cristiano Codagnone, 2017. "i-FRAME – Assessing impacts of social policy innovation in the EU: Proposed methodological framework to evaluate socio-economic returns on investment of social policy innovations," JRC Research Reports JRC108078, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Koskela, Erkki & Virén, Matti, 1990. "Monetary policy reaction functions and saving-investment correlations: Some cross-country evidence," Research Discussion Papers 11/1990, Bank of Finland.
    15. Juana Castro & Stefan Drews & Filippos Exadaktylos & Joël Foramitti & Franziska Klein & Théo Konc & Ivan Savin & Jeroen van den Bergh, 2020. "A review of agent‐based modeling of climate‐energy policy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), July.
    16. Tong, Howell, 2015. "Threshold models in time series analysis—Some reflections," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 189(2), pages 485-491.
    17. repec:eur:ejfejr:7 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Anna Borawska & Malgorzata Latuszynska, 2020. "Incorporating Neuroscience Data into Agent-Based Simulation Models of Buyer Behavior," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 1197-1212.
    19. Koskela, Erkki & Virén, Matti, 1990. "Monetary policy reaction functions and saving-investment correlations: Some cross-country evidence," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 11/1990, Bank of Finland.
    20. Pablo Pico-Valencia & Juan A Holgado-Terriza, 2018. "Agentification of the Internet of Things: A systematic literature review," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 14(10), pages 15501477188, October.
    21. Petra Ahrweiler, 2017. "Agent-based simulation for science, technology, and innovation policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 391-415, January.
    22. Amir Ali Safaei Pirooz & Mohammad J. Sanjari & Young-Jin Kim & Stuart Moore & Richard Turner & Wayne W. Weaver & Dipti Srinivasan & Josep M. Guerrero & Mohammad Shahidehpour, 2023. "Adaptation of High Spatio-Temporal Resolution Weather/Load Forecast in Real-World Distributed Energy-System Operation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eurjdp:v:7:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s40070-018-0092-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.