Email this article Future Computer-aided Decision-making Support Systems: Concerning more about the Mechanism of Human Behavior
Abstract
With the development of computer and network technology, more and more areas (such as power system security control, medical diagnosis system, government emergency management, stock invesment strategy anallysis, etc.) have gradually established decision-making support systems, which are mainly responsible for information collection, management and analysis. Studies show that decision-making support systems have greatly enhanced user productivity. So the engineers’ interest in designing computerized decision support systems has considerably increased in recent years. The current decision support systems mainly focus on data acquisition and analysis. They are responsible for providing large amounts of data continuously and delivering adaptable models, which can enable people to use these results effectively and then make decisions more quickly and accurately. Then, is there any real-time decision support system in the future that can change human’s judgment and decision-making? By behavior science research, this paper will provide some answers by presenting the results of a study that subliminal vision signal may have direct influence on human’s advanced cognitive process and finally change human’s decision under ambiguity. It will provide key technology and new research ideas for engineers to design more intelligent and more powerful decision-making support systems in the future.
Keywords
References
[1] Linda Ganzini, Ladislav Volicer, William A. Nelson, Ellen Fox, et al. Ten myths about decision-making capacity.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2004, 5(4): 263-267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1525-8610(04)70134-6
[2] Linda Ganzini, Ladislav Volicer, William A. Nelson, Ellen Fox, et al. Ten myths about decision-making capacity.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2004, 5(4): 263-267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1525-8610(04)70134-6
[3] Mathias S. Fleck, Sander M. Daselaar, Ian G. Dobbins, Roberto Cabeza. Role of Prefrontal and Anterior Cingulate Regions in Decision-Making Processes Shared by Memory and Nonmemory Tasks. Cerebral Cortex, 2006, 16(11): 1623-1630
PMid:16400154
[4] Bechara A. Decision-making,impulse control,and loss of willpower to resist drugs: a neurocognitive perspective. Nature Neuroscience, 2005,8:1458 – 1463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1584
PMid:16251988
[5] Nam-Hong Yim, Soung-Hie Kim, Hee-Woong Kim, Kee-Young Kwahk. Knowledge based decision making on higher level strategic concerns: system dynamics approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 2004, 27:143-158
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2003.12.019
[6] Thomas Enkel, Donya Gholizadeh, Oliver Von Bohlen Und Halbach, Carles Sanchis-segura, et al. Ambiguous-Cue Interpretation is Biased Under Stress- and Depression-Like States in Rats. Neuropsychopharmacology, 2010,35(4): 1008-1016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npp.2009.204
PMid:20043002 PMCid:3055368
[7] Rusfichini A. Emotion and reason in making decisions. Science, 2005, 310: 1624-1625
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1122179
PMid:16339434
[8] Linda Ganzini, Ladislav Volicer, William A. Nelson, Ellen Fox, et al. Ten myths about decision-making capacity.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2004, 5(4): 263-267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1525-8610(04)70134-6
[9] Platt M L, Huettel S A. Risky business: the neuroeconomics decision making under uncertainty. Nature Neuroscience, 2008, l1: 398-403
[10] Ghirardato P, Maccheroni F, Marinacci M. Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude. J. Econ. Theory, 2004, 118: 133-173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2003.12.004
[11] Sharon E. Beatty and Del l. Hawkins. Subliminal Stimulation: Some New Date and Interpreatation. Jouranl of Advertising, 1989.18:4-8
[12] Karlijn Massar, Abraham P. Buunk. Judging a book by its cover: Jealously after subliminal priming with attractive and unattractive faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 2010,49: 634-638
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.037
[13] Timothy D.Sweeny, Marcia Grabowecky, Satoru Suzuki, Ken A.Paller. Long-lasting effects of subliminal affective priming from facial expressions. Consciousness and Cognition, 2009,18: 929-938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.07.011
PMid:19695907 PMCid:2784103
[14] Erin J. Strahan, Steven J. Spencer, Mark P.Zanna. Subliminal priming and persuasion: Striking while the iron is hot. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2002,38: 556-568
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00502-4
[15] Henke, K., Treyer, V., Nagy, E. T., Kneifel, S., Dursteler, M., Nitsch, R. M., et al. Active hippocampus during nonconscious memories. Consciousness and Cognition, 2003,12: 31–48
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8100(02)00006-5
[16] Anthony J. Marcel. Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 1993,15:197-237
[17] Pulford B D, Iman A M. Size doesn’t really matter:Ambiguity aversion in Ellsberg urns with few balls. Experimental Psychology, 2008, 55: 31-37
http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.55.1.31
[18] Rode C, Cosmides L, Hell W. When and why do people avoid unknown probabilities in decisions under uncertainty? Testing some predictions from optimal forging theory. Cognition, 1999, 72: 269-304
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00041-4
[19] Zhang Feng-hua. Decision preferences of ambiguity decision making under different degrees of uncertainty. Psychological exploration, 2009, 29(6): 51-55
[20] Pratyush Bharati, Abhijit Chaudhury. An empirical investigation of decision-making satisfaction in web-based decision support systems. Decision support systems, 2004, 37(2): 187-197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(03)00006-X
Full Text: PDF