Pular para o conteúdo principal

Leitura Blog - The science of decision-making: why smart people do dumb things

 https://nesslabs.com/decision-making

We make thousands of choices everyday, often automatically, using mental models we have created over years of experience.

Modelos mentais: estão modelados na ROT

Decision-making is the process we use to identify and choose alternatives, producing a final choice, which may or may not result in an action. It can be more or less rational based on the decision maker’s values, beliefs, and (perceived) knowledge.

Decidir não agir é uma decisão também. 

What’s interesting is that these areas are not only involved in the formation of a decision, but also signal the degree of confidence associated with the decision.

Grau de Confiança e Grau de Risco das decisões

In fact, poor decision-making rarely has to do with a lack of intelligence or information. Instead, we it’s often due to the ‘mental baggage’ we bring to the table when considering our options.

Pobres em que sentido?

Analysis paralysis. You may know this one under the term “overthinking.” You basically tend to spend so much time analysing all the possible outcomes that you never end up making a decision — which, often, is a bad decision in itself.

Análise das opções (mesmo que poucas) com muitos critérios

Information overload. We usually use information at our disposal to reduce uncertainty and make what we think our sound decisions. But sometimes, there’s more information that we can actually process. This can result in the illusion of knowledge and poor decision-making.

Mais difícil decidir quando tem muitas opções

Intuitive vs. rational. Your decision-making is the result of a fight between two kinds of cognitive processes. The first, called System 1, is an automatic intuitive system. The second (you guessed it, System 2), is an effortful rational system. System 1 is fast, implicit, and bottom-up, while system 2 is slow, explicit, and top-down. You can read more about it in the excellent book Thinking, Fast and Slow by psychologist Daniel Kahneman.

Dica de Livro interessante

Maximising vs. satisficing. People tend to fall under two main cognitive styles. Maximisers try to make an optimal decision, whereas satisficers simply try to find a solution that is good enough. As a result, maximisers usually take longer to make a decision, thinking carefully about the potential outcomes and corresponding tradeoffs. They will also tend to regret their decisions more often.

O ótimo é inimigo do bom!!! Demorar para decidir pode fazer a decisão perder o efeito pela mudança do cenário.

 

 

 

To put it simply, mental models are a set of beliefs and ideas that we consciously or unconsciously form based on our experiences. They guide our thoughts and behaviours and help us understand life. They’re basically thinking tools—shortcuts for reasoning.

 

Comentários

Postagens mais visitadas deste blog

Connected Papers: Uma abordagem alternativa para revisão da literatura

Durante um projeto de pesquisa podemos encontrar um artigo que nos identificamos em termos de problema de pesquisa e também de solução. Então surge a vontade de saber como essa área de pesquisa se desenvolveu até chegar a esse ponto ou quais desdobramentos ocorreram a partir dessa solução proposta para identificar o estado da arte nesse tema. Podemos seguir duas abordagens:  realizar uma revisão sistemática usando palavras chaves que melhor caracterizam o tema em bibliotecas digitais de referência para encontrar artigos relacionados ou realizar snowballing ancorado nesse artigo que identificamos previamente, explorando os artigos citados (backward) ou os artigos que o citam (forward)  Mas a ferramenta Connected Papers propõe uma abordagem alternativa para essa busca. O problema inicial é dado um artigo de interesse, precisamos encontrar outros artigos relacionados de "certa forma". Find different methods and approaches to the same subject Track down the state of the art rese...

Knowledge Graph Embedding with Triple Context - Leitura de Abstract

  Jun Shi, Huan Gao, Guilin Qi, and Zhangquan Zhou. 2017. Knowledge Graph Embedding with Triple Context. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2299–2302. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132847.3133119 ABSTRACT Knowledge graph embedding, which aims to represent entities and relations in vector spaces, has shown outstanding performance on a few knowledge graph completion tasks. Most existing methods are based on the assumption that a knowledge graph is a set of separate triples, ignoring rich graph features, i.e., structural information in the graph. In this paper, we take advantages of structures in knowledge graphs, especially local structures around a triple, which we refer to as triple context. We then propose a Triple-Context-based knowledge Embedding model (TCE). For each triple, two kinds of structure information are considered as its context in the graph; one is the out...

KnOD 2021

Beyond Facts: Online Discourse and Knowledge Graphs A preface to the proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Knowledge Graphs for Online Discourse Analysis (KnOD 2021, co-located with TheWebConf’21) https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2877/preface.pdf https://knod2021.wordpress.com/   ABSTRACT Expressing opinions and interacting with others on the Web has led to the production of an abundance of online discourse data, such as claims and viewpoints on controversial topics, their sources and contexts . This data constitutes a valuable source of insights for studies into misinformation spread, bias reinforcement, echo chambers or political agenda setting. While knowledge graphs promise to provide the key to a Web of structured information, they are mainly focused on facts without keeping track of the diversity, connection or temporal evolution of online discourse data. As opposed to facts, claims are inherently more complex. Their interpretation strongly depends on the context and a vari...