The Experts below are selected from a list of 324 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Matthias Brand - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
monitoring supports performance in a dual task paradigm involving a risky decision making task and a working memory task
Frontiers in Psychology, 2015Co-Authors: Bettina Gathmann, Johannes Schiebener, Oliver T Wolf, Matthias BrandAbstract:Performing two cognitively demanding tasks at the same time is known to decrease performance. The current study investigates the underlying executive functions of a dual-tasking situation involving the simultaneous performance of decision making under explicit risk and a working memory task. It is suggested that making a decision and performing a working memory task at the same time should particularly require monitoring - an executive control process supervising behavior and the state of processing on two tasks. To test the role of a supervisory/monitoring function in such a dual-tasking situation we investigated 122 participants with the Game of Dice Task plus 2-back task (GDT plus 2-back task). This dual task requires participants to make decisions under risk and to perform a 2-back working memory task at the same time. Furthermore, a task measuring a set of several executive functions gathered in the term Concept Formation (Modified Card Sorting Test, MCST) and the newly developed Balanced Switching Task (BST), measuring monitoring in particular, were used. The results demonstrate that Concept Formation and monitoring are involved in the simultaneous performance of decision making under risk and a working memory task. In particular, the mediation analysis revealed that BST performance partially mediates the influence of MCST performance on the GDT plus 2-back task. These findings suggest that monitoring is one important subfunction for superior performance in a dual-tasking situation including decision making under risk and a working memory task.
-
among three different executive functions general executive control ability is a key predictor of decision making under objective risk
Frontiers in Psychology, 2014Co-Authors: Johannes Schiebener, Bettina Gathmann, Matthias Brand, Elisa Wegmann, Christian Laier, Mirko PawlikowskiAbstract:Executive functioning is supposed to have an important role in decision making under risk. Several studies reported that more advantageous decision-making behavior was accompanied by better performance in tests of executive functioning and that the decision-making process was accompanied by activations in prefrontal and subcortical brain regions associated with executive functioning. However, to what extent different components of executive functions contribute to decision making is still unclear. We tested direct and indirect effects of three executive functions on decision-making performance in a laboratory gambling task, the Game of Dice Task (GDT). Using Brand’s model of decisions under risk (2006) we tested seven structural equation models with three latent variables that represent executive functions supposed to be involved in decision making. The latent variables were general control (represented by the general ability to exert attentional and behavioral self-control that is in accordance with task goals despite interfering inFormation), Concept Formation (represented by categorization, rule detection, and set maintenance), and monitoring (represented by supervision of cognition and behavior). The seven models indicated that only the latent dimension general control had a direct effect on decision making under risk. Concept Formation and monitoring only contributed in terms of indirect effects, when mediated by general control. Thus, several components of executive functioning seem to be involved in decision making under risk. However, general control functions seem to have a key role. They may be important for implementing the calculative and cognitively controlled processes involved in advantageous decision making under risk.
Jason Seawright - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
putting typologies to work Concept Formation measurement and analytic rigor
Political Research Quarterly, 2012Co-Authors: David Collier, Jody Laporte, Jason SeawrightAbstract:Typologies are a well-established analytic tool in the social sciences. Working with typologies contributes decisively to forming Concepts, exploring dimensionality, establishing measurement categories, and grouping cases. Yet some critics – basing their arguments on what they believe to be relevant norms of quantitative measurement – consider typologies to be an old-fashioned and unsophisticated mode of analysis. We show that this critique is methodologically unsound. The use of typologies can and should proceed according to high standards of rigor. We offer a basic template for constructing typologies and show how they can be “put to work” in refining Concepts and measurement, examining underlying dimensions, and organizing explanatory claims and causal inference. The conclusion presents guidelines for careful work with typologies.
-
putting typologies to work Concept Formation measurement and analytic rigor
Political Research Quarterly, 2012Co-Authors: David Collier, Jody Laporte, Jason SeawrightAbstract:Typologies are well-established analytic tools in the social sciences. They can be “put to work” in forming Concepts, refining measurement, exploring dimensionality, and organizing explanatory clai...
Bettina Gathmann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
monitoring supports performance in a dual task paradigm involving a risky decision making task and a working memory task
Frontiers in Psychology, 2015Co-Authors: Bettina Gathmann, Johannes Schiebener, Oliver T Wolf, Matthias BrandAbstract:Performing two cognitively demanding tasks at the same time is known to decrease performance. The current study investigates the underlying executive functions of a dual-tasking situation involving the simultaneous performance of decision making under explicit risk and a working memory task. It is suggested that making a decision and performing a working memory task at the same time should particularly require monitoring - an executive control process supervising behavior and the state of processing on two tasks. To test the role of a supervisory/monitoring function in such a dual-tasking situation we investigated 122 participants with the Game of Dice Task plus 2-back task (GDT plus 2-back task). This dual task requires participants to make decisions under risk and to perform a 2-back working memory task at the same time. Furthermore, a task measuring a set of several executive functions gathered in the term Concept Formation (Modified Card Sorting Test, MCST) and the newly developed Balanced Switching Task (BST), measuring monitoring in particular, were used. The results demonstrate that Concept Formation and monitoring are involved in the simultaneous performance of decision making under risk and a working memory task. In particular, the mediation analysis revealed that BST performance partially mediates the influence of MCST performance on the GDT plus 2-back task. These findings suggest that monitoring is one important subfunction for superior performance in a dual-tasking situation including decision making under risk and a working memory task.
-
among three different executive functions general executive control ability is a key predictor of decision making under objective risk
Frontiers in Psychology, 2014Co-Authors: Johannes Schiebener, Bettina Gathmann, Matthias Brand, Elisa Wegmann, Christian Laier, Mirko PawlikowskiAbstract:Executive functioning is supposed to have an important role in decision making under risk. Several studies reported that more advantageous decision-making behavior was accompanied by better performance in tests of executive functioning and that the decision-making process was accompanied by activations in prefrontal and subcortical brain regions associated with executive functioning. However, to what extent different components of executive functions contribute to decision making is still unclear. We tested direct and indirect effects of three executive functions on decision-making performance in a laboratory gambling task, the Game of Dice Task (GDT). Using Brand’s model of decisions under risk (2006) we tested seven structural equation models with three latent variables that represent executive functions supposed to be involved in decision making. The latent variables were general control (represented by the general ability to exert attentional and behavioral self-control that is in accordance with task goals despite interfering inFormation), Concept Formation (represented by categorization, rule detection, and set maintenance), and monitoring (represented by supervision of cognition and behavior). The seven models indicated that only the latent dimension general control had a direct effect on decision making under risk. Concept Formation and monitoring only contributed in terms of indirect effects, when mediated by general control. Thus, several components of executive functioning seem to be involved in decision making under risk. However, general control functions seem to have a key role. They may be important for implementing the calculative and cognitively controlled processes involved in advantageous decision making under risk.
Johannes Schiebener - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
monitoring supports performance in a dual task paradigm involving a risky decision making task and a working memory task
Frontiers in Psychology, 2015Co-Authors: Bettina Gathmann, Johannes Schiebener, Oliver T Wolf, Matthias BrandAbstract:Performing two cognitively demanding tasks at the same time is known to decrease performance. The current study investigates the underlying executive functions of a dual-tasking situation involving the simultaneous performance of decision making under explicit risk and a working memory task. It is suggested that making a decision and performing a working memory task at the same time should particularly require monitoring - an executive control process supervising behavior and the state of processing on two tasks. To test the role of a supervisory/monitoring function in such a dual-tasking situation we investigated 122 participants with the Game of Dice Task plus 2-back task (GDT plus 2-back task). This dual task requires participants to make decisions under risk and to perform a 2-back working memory task at the same time. Furthermore, a task measuring a set of several executive functions gathered in the term Concept Formation (Modified Card Sorting Test, MCST) and the newly developed Balanced Switching Task (BST), measuring monitoring in particular, were used. The results demonstrate that Concept Formation and monitoring are involved in the simultaneous performance of decision making under risk and a working memory task. In particular, the mediation analysis revealed that BST performance partially mediates the influence of MCST performance on the GDT plus 2-back task. These findings suggest that monitoring is one important subfunction for superior performance in a dual-tasking situation including decision making under risk and a working memory task.
-
among three different executive functions general executive control ability is a key predictor of decision making under objective risk
Frontiers in Psychology, 2014Co-Authors: Johannes Schiebener, Bettina Gathmann, Matthias Brand, Elisa Wegmann, Christian Laier, Mirko PawlikowskiAbstract:Executive functioning is supposed to have an important role in decision making under risk. Several studies reported that more advantageous decision-making behavior was accompanied by better performance in tests of executive functioning and that the decision-making process was accompanied by activations in prefrontal and subcortical brain regions associated with executive functioning. However, to what extent different components of executive functions contribute to decision making is still unclear. We tested direct and indirect effects of three executive functions on decision-making performance in a laboratory gambling task, the Game of Dice Task (GDT). Using Brand’s model of decisions under risk (2006) we tested seven structural equation models with three latent variables that represent executive functions supposed to be involved in decision making. The latent variables were general control (represented by the general ability to exert attentional and behavioral self-control that is in accordance with task goals despite interfering inFormation), Concept Formation (represented by categorization, rule detection, and set maintenance), and monitoring (represented by supervision of cognition and behavior). The seven models indicated that only the latent dimension general control had a direct effect on decision making under risk. Concept Formation and monitoring only contributed in terms of indirect effects, when mediated by general control. Thus, several components of executive functioning seem to be involved in decision making under risk. However, general control functions seem to have a key role. They may be important for implementing the calculative and cognitively controlled processes involved in advantageous decision making under risk.
John S Gero - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Concept Formation in scientific knowledge discovery from a constructivist view
Scientific Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2009Co-Authors: John S GeroAbstract:The central goal of scientific knowledge discovery is to learn cause–effect relationships among natural phenomena presented as variables and the consequences their interactions. Scientific knowledge is normally expressed as scientific taxonomies and qualitative and quantitative laws [1]. This type of knowledge represents intrinsic regularities of the observed phenomena that can be used to explain and predict behaviors of the phenomena. It is a generalization that is abstracted and externalized from a set of contexts and applicable to a broader scope. Scientific knowledge is a type of third-person knowledge, i.e., knowledge that independent of a specific enquirer. Artificial intelligence approaches, particularly data mining algorithms that are used to identify meaningful patterns from large data sets, are approaches that aim to facilitate the knowledge discovery process [2]. A broad spectrum of algorithms has been developed in addressing classification, associative learning, and clustering problems. However, their linkages to people who use them have not been adequately explored. Issues in relation to supporting the interpretation of the patterns, the application of prior knowledge to the data mining process and addressing user interactions remain challenges for building knowledge discovery tools [3]. As a consequence, scientists rely on their experience to formulate problems, evaluate hypotheses, reason about untraceable factors and derive new problems. This type of knowledge which they have developed during their career is called “first-person” knowledge. The Formation of scientific knowledge (third-person knowledge) is highly influenced by the enquirer’s first-person knowledge construct, which is a result of his or her interactions with the environment. There have been attempts to craft automatic knowledge discovery tools but these systems are limited in their capabilities to handle the dynamics of personal experience. There are now trends in developing approaches to assist scientists applying their expertise to model Formation, simulation, and prediction in various domains [4], [5]. On the other hand, first-person knowledge becomes third-person theory only if it proves general by evidence and is acknowledged by a scientific community. Researchers start to focus on building interactive cooperation platforms [1] to accommodate different views into the knowledge discovery process. There are some fundamental questions in relation to scientific knowledge development. What aremajor components for knowledge construction and how do people construct their knowledge? How is this personal construct assimilated and accommodated into a scientific paradigm? How can one design a computational system to facilitate these processes? This chapter does not attempt to answer all these questions but serves as a basis to foster thinking along this line. A brief literature review about how people develop their knowledge is carried out through a constructivist view. A hydrological modeling scenario is presented to elucidate the approach.
-
a computational framework for Concept Formation for a situated design agent
Knowledge Based Systems, 2000Co-Authors: John S Gero, Haruyuki FujiiAbstract:Abstract This paper takes the approach that designing is situated and that Concepts are formed as a consequence of the situatedness of designing. The paper presents a framework for Concept Formation that draws on a structure of a design agent that includes sensors, perceptors and Conceptors that interact with each other and the external and internal environment of the agent to produce the situation that is a contingent basis for the Formation and use of Concepts.