Lincoln, Yvonna, and Egon Guba, "Postpositivism and the Naturalist Paradigm," pp. 14-46 in Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.*

การวจยเชงคณภาพ เปนเครองมอสำคญอยางหนงสำหรบทำความเขาใจสงคมและพฤตกรรมมนษย การวจยแบบการสรางทฤษฎจากขอมล กเปนหนงในหลายระเบยบวธการวจยเชงคณภาพทกำลงไดรบความสนใจ และเปนทนยมเพมสงขนเรอยๆ จากนกวชาการ และนกวจยในสาขาสงคมศาสตร และศาสตรอนๆ เชน พฤตกรรมศาสตร สงคมวทยา สาธารณสขศาสตร พยาบาลศาสตร จตวทยาสงคม ศกษาศาสตร รฐศาสตร และสารสนเทศศกษา ดงนน หนงสอเรอง “ConstructingGrounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis” หรอ “การสรางทฤษฎจากขอมล:แนวทางการปฏบตผานการวเคราะหเชงคณภาพ” จะชวยใหผอานมความรความเขาใจถงพฒนาการของปฏบตการวจยแบบสรางทฤษฎจากขอมล ตลอดจนแนวทาง และกระบวนการปฏบตการวจยอยางเปนระบบ จงเปนหนงสอทควรคาแกการอานโดยเฉพาะนกวจยรนใหม เพอเปนแนวทางในการนำความรความเขาใจไประยกตในงานวจยของตน อกทงนกวจยผเชยวชาญสามารถอานเพอขยายมโนทศนดานวจยใหกวางขวางขน

Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis

Established in 2006, TATA Africa Services (Nigeria) Limited operates as the nodal point for Tata businesses in West Africa. TATA Africa Services (Nigeria) Limited has a strong presence in Nigeria with investments exceeding USD 10 million. The company was established in Lagos, Nigeria as a subsidiary of TATA Africa Holdings (SA) (Pty) Limited, South Africa and serves as the hub of Tata’s operations in Nigeria and the rest of West Africa.

What About Us

Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions

We focus on ways of combining simple database models with managerial intuition. We present a model and method for isolating managerial intuition. For five different business forecasting situations, our results indicate that a combination of model and manager always outperforms either of these decision inputs in isolation, an average R2 increase of 0.09 (16%) above the best single decision input in cross-validated model analyses. We assess the validity of an equal weighting heuristic, 50% model + 50% manager, and then discuss why our results might differ from previous research on expert judgment.

Database Models And Managerial Intuition: 50% Model + 50% Manager

Improving the practical application of the Delphi method in group-based judgment: A six-step prescription for a well-founded and defensible process

Criminal sentencers must weight and integrate many different factors to reach a judgment, including aggravating factors that argue for a harsher sentence, and mitigating factors that suggest a more lenient sentence. Personal Mitigating Factors (PMFs) relate to the offender, rather than the offence (e.g., remorse or youth/immaturity). Research shows that discretionary sentencing produces inconsistency and bias and lacks the transparency needed to maintain public trust in justice. Although many jurisdictions have introduced more structured sentencing, the mitigation process remains largely discretionary. Structuring personal mitigation could help produce fairer sentences. Any structured approach must, however, be informed by empirical data, and little is known about how sentencers use PMFs, or how the public judges them. This thesis examined the role of three commonly occurring PMFs: remorse, good character, and addressing addiction. 
Study 1 examined sentencers’ use of PMFs in cases of assault and burglary through a statistical analysis of annual sentencing data from the Crown Court in England and Wales. Study 2 used a qualitative analysis of interviews with a small sample of Crown Court judges to further explore the findings of Study 1 and identify topics for future research. Studies 3 and 4 used experimental designs to measure how the three PMFs influenced public judgments about sentencing fairness and choice of sentence length. Study 4’s “idiographic” design permitted evaluation of the variation between individuals’ judgments about PMFs. 
The present thesis identified several issues with current sentencing practice, notably the underweighting of multiple co-occurring PMFs, and proposed some practical options for structuring the personal mitigation process. The thesis also identified conflicts between sentencers’ use of PMFs and public judgments, and suggested how the gap between sentencers and the public could be closed. Lastly, the thesis illustrates how methodology from psychology can be used to advance our understanding of criminal sentencing.

The role of personal mitigating factors in criminal sentencing judgments : an empirical investigation

Cognitive continuum theory points to the middle-ground between the intuitive and analytic modes of cognition, called quasirationality. In the context of sentencing, we discuss how legal models prescribe the use of different modes of cognition. These models aim to help judges perform the cognitive balancing act required between factors indicating a more or less severe penalty for an offender. We compare sentencing in three common law jurisdictions (i.e., Australia, the US, and England and Wales). Each places a different emphasis on the use of intuition and analysis; but all are quasirational. We conclude that the most appropriate mode of cognition will likely be that which corresponds best with properties of the sentencingtask. Finally, we discuss the implications of this cognition-task correspondence approach for researchers and legal policy-makers.

Quasirational models of sentencing

The intelligence community uses ‘structured analytic techniques’ to help analysts think critically and avoid cognitive bias. However, little evidence exists of how techniques are applied and whether they are effective. We examined the use of the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) – a technique designed to reduce ‘confirmation bias’. Fifty intelligence analysts were randomly assigned to use ACH or not when completing a hypothesis testing task that had probabilistic ground truth. Data on analysts’ judgment processes and conclusions was collected using written protocols that were then coded for statistical analyses. We found that ACH-trained analysts did not follow all of the steps of ACH. There was mixed evidence for ACH’s ability to reduce confirmation bias, and we observed that ACH may increase judgment inconsistency and error. It may be prudent for the intelligence community to consider the conditions under which ACH would prove useful, and to explore alternatives.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/acp.3550

The “analysis of competing hypotheses” in intelligence analysis.

According to the scales of justice, the judge, in an unbiased way and directed by law, attends to all of the available information in a case, weighs it according to its significance, and integrates it to make a decision. By contrast, research suggests that judicial decision-making departs from the cognitive balancing act depicted by the scales of justice. Nevertheless, the research is often dismissed as irrelevant, and the judiciary, legal policy-makers and the public remain largely unconvinced that the status quo needs improving. One potential rebuttal to the scientific findings is that they lack validity because researchers did not study judges making decisions on real cases. Another potential argument is that researchers have not pinpointed the psychological processes of any specific judge because they analyzed data over judges and/or used statistical models lacking in psychological plausibility. We review these two grounds for appeal against the scientific research on judicial decision-making, and note that it appears researchers’ choices of data collection methods and analytic techniques may, indeed, be inappropriate for understanding the phenomena. We offer two remedies from the sphere of decision-making research: collecting data on judicial decision-making using representative design, and analyzing judicial decision data using more psychologically plausible models. Used together, we believe these solutions can help researchers better understand and improve legal decision-making.

/pdf/on-getting-inside-the-judge-s-mind-4cc3olvxmh.pdf

Ian Belton

Papers

Improving the practical application of the Delphi method in group-based judgment: A six-step prescription for a well-founded and defensible process

The role of personal mitigating factors in criminal sentencing judgments : an empirical investigation

Quasirational models of sentencing

The “analysis of competing hypotheses” in intelligence analysis.

On getting inside the judge’s mind