Showing papers on "Judgement published in 2008"

Three lenses of evidence-based policy

Abstract: This article discusses recent trends to incorporate the results of systematic research (or ‘evidence’) into policy development, program evaluation and program improvement. This process is consistent with the New Public Management (NPM) emphasis on efficiency and effectiveness. Analysis of evidence helps to answer the questions ‘what works? and ‘what happens if we change these settings?’ Secondly, some of the well known challenges and limitations for ‘evidence-based’ policy are outlined. Policy decisions emerge from politics, judgement and debate, rather than being deduced from empirical analysis. Policy debate and analysis involves an interplay between facts, norms and desired actions, in which ‘evidence’ is diverse and contestable. Thirdly, the article outlines a distinction between technical and negotiated approaches to problem-solving. The latter is a prominent feature of policy domains rich in ‘network’ approaches, partnering and community engagement. Networks and partnerships bring to the negotiation table a diversity of stakeholder ‘evidence’, ie, relevant information, interpretations and priorities. Finally, it is suggested that three types of evidence/perspective are especially relevant in the modern era ‐ systematic (‘scientific’) research, program management experience (‘practice’), and political judgement. What works for program clients is intrinsically connected to what works for managers and for political leaders. Thus, the practical craft of policy development and adjustment involves ‘weaving’ strands of information and values as seen through the lens of these three key stakeholder groups. There is not one evidence-base but several bases. These disparate bodies of knowledge become multiple sets of evidence that inform and influence policy rather than determine it.

Power, politics, and organizational change: winning the turf game

Abstract: When Necessity Commands The Terminology Game Defining Power and Politics Sit in Judgement Men Behaving Badly Women Behaving Badly Entrepreneurial Heroes The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Power-assisted Steering Accounting and Winning Political Expertise Why You Need It, and How To Develop It

Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies IV

Abstract: We continue the work initiated in [1–3], where the acceptance logic, a modal logic for modelling individual and collective acceptances was introduced. This logic is aimed at capturing the concept of acceptance qua member of an institution as the kind of attitude that agents are committed to when they are “functioning as members of an institution”. Acceptance logic can also be used to model judgement aggregation: it deals with how a collective acceptance of the members of an institution about a certain fact φ is created from the individual acceptances of the members of the institution. The contribution of this paper is to present a tableau method for the logic of acceptance. The method automatically decides whether a formula of the logic of acceptance is satisfiable thereby providing an automated reasoning procedure for judgement aggregation in the logic of acceptance.

Prognostic validity of the Timed Up-and-Go test, a modified Get-Up-and-Go test, staff's global judgement and fall history in evaluating fall risk in residential care facilities

Abstract: Prognostic validity of the Timed Up-and-Go test, a modified Get Up-and-Go test, staff's global judgement and fall history in evaluating fall risk in residential care facilities

De Testimonio: on the evidence for decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions

Abstract: Decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions, whether for individuals or entire healthcare systems, should be based on the totality of the available evidence. The notion that evidence can be reliably or usefully placed in ‘hierarchies’ is illusory. Rather, decision makers need to exercise judgement about whether (and when) evidence gathered from experimental or observational sources is fit for purpose.

The Qualities of Leadership: Direction, Communication, and Obfuscation

Abstract: Party activists wish to (i) advocate the best policy and yet (ii) unify be- hind a common party line. An activist's understanding of his environment is based on the speeches of party leaders. A leader's influence, measured by the weight placed on her speech, increases with her judgement on policy (sense of direction) and her ability to convey ideas (clarity of communication). A leader with perfect clarity of communication enjoys greater influence than one with a perfect sense of direction. Activists can choose how much attention to pay to leaders. A necessary condition for a leader to monopolize the agenda is that she is the most coherent communicator. Sometimes leaders attract more attention by obfuscating their mes- sages. A concern for party unity mitigates this incentive; when activists emphasize following the party line, they learn more about their environment. Political scientists and commentators agree that good leadership is important, indeed fundamental, to the successful performance of organizations. But what is leadership? When is leadership good? When is it successful? Which qualities contribute to good and successful leadership, and in what measure do they contribute? Leadership can be important when political actors wish to act in tune with both their en- vironment and with each other. An individual may be unsure about the general circum- stances surrounding his decision and uncertain about others' likely actions. Leaders can help. As Levi (2006) argued recently, "leadership ... provides the learning environment that enables individuals to transform or revise beliefs." By fostering an understanding of the political landscape a leader helps to inform the actions of a mass and, through her communication, unifies expectations about how others will act. To illustrate, consider a political party populated by a mass of party activists. An activist advocates the policy he believes to be desirable, based on his understanding of the polit- ical environment. He may, however, not know which policy is best; leadership can help him in his quest. As a member of a political organization, he is also concerned with the

Researching with Integrity: The Ethics of Academic Enquiry

Abstract: There is increased emphasis internationally on ethically sound research, and on good training for research supervisors. Researching with Integrity aims to identify what and how research can be undertaken ethically and with ‘virtue’ from initial conception of ideas through to dissemination. It outlines the context in which academics engage in research, considering the impact of discipline and institutional culture, the influence of government audit of research ‘quality’, the role of government and quangos, professional organisations and business sponsors, and examines the effects of the increasing power and influence of funding bodies, university ethics committees and codes of practice. Based on the notion of ‘virtue’ ethics, this book proposes an alternative approach to research, which focuses not only on ethical rules and protocol to avoid unethical research, but encourages academic, professional and character development and allows for the exercise of personal judgement. Themes considered include: Increased competitiveness between academics and concentration of funding in fewer universities Increasingly bureaucratic approval of processes focused on the treatment of human and animals in research Meeting the expectations of research sponsors ‘Taboo’ research topics and methods Exposing findings to the scrutiny of peers, taking credit for the work of others and self-citation Bullying of junior researchers and plagiarism Power and influence of institutional, discipline-based and professional organisations.

Clinical judgement and decision-making in nursing - nine modes of practice in a revised cognitive continuum.

Abstract: Title. Clinical judgement and decision-making in nursing – nine modes of practice in a revised cognitive continuum Aim. This paper is a report of an evaluation of cognitive continuum theory and identification of revisions required for application to clinical judgement and decision-making in nursing. Background. The importance of nurses’ developing and applying sound clinical judgement is reflected in an international classification of nursing practice. Cognitive continuum theory synthesizes rival and complementary approaches to decision theory in an accessible format, which has been applied in medicine, and various nursing scholars have advocated its use to enhance the effectiveness of nurses’ clinical judgement and decision-making. Method. Parse’s structure and process criteria are applied in critiquing the relevance of cognitive continuum theory to nursing. Findings. Cognitive continuum theory illustrates how different judgement tasks are suited to different thought processes and how matching the two can optimize decision-making. However, existing modes of inquiry applied to medicine emphasize experimental research, ignoring many alternative approaches used in nursing. A revised version of the cognitive continuum is developed, incorporating examples of nursing judgements and decisions, a broader evidence base, an ethical dimension, and evaluative competence criteria. Conclusion. The revised cognitive continuum promotes awareness of the nature and the variety of patient-centred judgement tasks and decisions in nursing, how to select the most suitable intervention tactic from available options, and the fallibility of all forms of human judgement from intuitive/experiential to analytic/rational. Hence, it is recommended for use as an educational tool and practice guide to facilitate theory development and the practice of judgement and decision-making in nursing.

Vignette studies of medical choice and judgement to study caregivers' medical decision behaviour: systematic review.

Abstract: Vignette studies of medical choice and judgement have gained popularity in the medical literature. Originally developed in mathematical psychology they can be used to evaluate physicians' behaviour in the setting of diagnostic testing or treatment decisions. We provide an overview of the use, objectives and methodology of these studies in the medical field. Systematic review. We searched in electronic databases; reference lists of included studies. We included studies that examined medical decisions of physicians, nurses or medical students using cue weightings from answers to structured vignettes. Two reviewers scrutinized abstracts and examined full text copies of potentially eligible studies. The aim of the included studies, the type of clinical decision, the number of participants, some technical aspects, and the type of statistical analysis were extracted in duplicate and discrepancies were resolved by consensus. 30 reports published between 1983 and 2005 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 22 studies (73%) reported on treatment decisions and 27 (90%) explored the variation of decisions among experts. Nine studies (30%) described differences in decisions between groups of caregivers and ten studies (33%) described the decision behaviour of only one group. Only six studies (20%) compared decision behaviour against an empirical reference of a correct decision. The median number of considered attributes was 6.5 (IQR 4–9), the median number of vignettes was 27 (IQR 16–40). In 17 studies, decision makers had to rate the relative importance of a given vignette; in six studies they had to assign a probability to each vignette. Only ten studies (33%) applied a statistical procedure to account for correlated data. Various studies of medical choice and judgement have been performed to depict weightings of the value of clinical information from answers to structured vignettes of care givers. We found that the design and analysis methods used in current applications vary considerably and could be improved in a large number of cases.

Policy Review “Supporting Excellence in the Arts: from measurement to judgement”

Abstract: The DCMS paper “Supporting excellence in the arts”, also known as the McMaster Review, raised more questions than it answered in terms of how UK cultural policy is likely to develop in the future. Although many of its intentions are laudable, the report fails to resolve the inherent problems associated with defining, measuring and judging cultural “excellence”, even though this forms the core of McMaster's argument about how policy should develop. This may have significant implications for cultural institutions in the future. In addition, many of the report's recommendations may either be contradictory or impractical in the current policy climate – such as the desire for institutions to take more risks whilst simultaneously increasing visitor numbers and meeting other targets. As such, without a wider change in the Government's approach and a re-acknowledgement of culture's intrinsic value, “excellence” may just become the latest buzzword for practitioners, rather than the key principle upon which future ...

Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgement of global risks

Abstract: All else being equal, not many people would prefer to destroy the world. Even faceless corporations, meddling governments, reckless scientists, and other agents of doom, require a world in which to achieve their goals of profit, order, tenure, or other villainies. If our extinction proceeds slowly enough to allow a moment of horrified realization, the doers of the deed will likely be quite taken aback on realizing that they have actually destroyed the world. Therefore I suggest that if the Earth is destroyed, it will probably be by mistake.

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? The Viking and Laval Cases in the ECJ

Abstract: This article analyses the judgements of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Case C-438/05 International Transport Workers' Federation and Finnish Seamen's Union v Viking Line (Judgement 11 December 2007) and Case C-341/05 Laval v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareforbundet (Judgement 18 December 2007). In these cases, the ECJ held that where industrial action infringes an employer's free movement rights under Article 43 EC (freedom of establishment) and Article 49 EC (freedom to provide services), respectively, these Treaty provisions can have horizontal direct effect against the unions organizing the action. Unions may defend themselves against these claims by asserting a right to strike (which the Court recognized as a fundamental right within Community law) but only where they are acting proportionately in the exercise of that right. The article explores the key elements of the ECJ's decisions on direct effect, fundamental rights and proportionality, and draws out some of the implications of these cases for English law. © 2008 Industrial Law Society; all rights reserved.

Framing the user experience: information biases on website quality judgement

Abstract: Understanding the complexities of users' judgements and user experience is a prerequisite for informing HCI design. Current user experience (UX) research emphasises that, beyond usability, non-instrumental aspects of system quality contribute to overall judgement and that the user experience is subjective and variable. Based on judgement and decision-making theory, we have previously demonstrated that judgement of websites can be influenced by contextual factors. This paper explores the strength of such contextual influence by investigating framing effects on user judgement of website quality. Two experimental studies investigate how the presentation of information about a website influences the user experience and the relative importance of individual quality attributes for overall judgement. Theoretical implications for the emerging field of UX research and practical implications for design are discussed.

Consistent judgement aggregation: the truth-functional case

Abstract: Generalizing the celebrated “discursive dilemma”, we analyze judgement aggregation problems in which a group of agents independently votes on a set of complex propositions (the “conclusions”) and on a set of “premises” by which the conclusions are truth-functionally determined. We show that for conclusion- and premise-based aggregation rules to be mutually consistent, the aggregation must always be “oligarchic”, that is: unanimous within a subset of agents, and typically even be dictatorial. We characterize exactly when consistent non-dictatorial (or anonymous) aggregation rules exist, allowing for arbitrary conclusions and arbitrary interdependencies among premises.

Understanding the Dynamics of Decision-Making and Choice: A Scoping Study of Key Psychological Theories to Inform The Design and Analysis of the Panel Study

Abstract: At the heart of SPRU’s DH-funded programme of research is a qualitative longitudinal Panel Study that aims to examine the choices that older people, disabled young people, disabled adults and their carers make about their services and support; how these choices change over time; and the implications for their experience of independence. To inform the Panel Study and drawing mainly on psychological research, we conducted a review of the main theoretical models of decision-making and choice. Unlike systematic reviews, the review did not set out to identify and evaluate the existing evidence base. Instead the review identifies the main areas of psychological theory and research relevant to choices about welfare services; and assesses the implications of these for the design and analysis of the Panel Study. The review covers the main theories of judgement, decision-making and choice; the factors such as emotion, which affect choice and decision-making; and evidence on specific decision-making situations, including joint decision-making with another person, making choices on behalf of someone else and decision-making within close relationships.

The Researcher as Insider Versus the Researcher as Outsider: Enhancing Rigour Through Language and Cultural Sensitivity

Abstract: Evidence suggests that in research studies involving minority language users, rigour is enhanced when researchers share a common language and culture with research participants and thus are considered to be “insiders”. However, it is clear that the use of “insiders” is not always possible and where the researchers and the researched do not share a common culture and language, measures can be taken to ensure that the research is rigorous. Furthermore, cultural and linguistic concordance does not in itself guarantee rigour; researchers must also demonstrate that their approach stands up to judgement against criteria that are congruent with the relevant research paradigm.

Factors and indices are one thing, deciding who is scholarly, why they are scholarly, and the relative value of their scholarship is something else entirely

Abstract: Quantifying the relative performance of individual scholars, groups of scholars, depart- ments, institutions, provinces/states/regions and countries has become an integral part of decision- making over research policy, funding allocations, awarding of grants, faculty hirings, and claims for promotion and tenure. Bibliometric indices (based mainly upon citation counts), such as the h-index and the journal impact factor (JIF), are heavily relied upon in such assessments. There is a growing consensus, and a deep concern, that these indices — more and more often used as a replacement for the informed judgement of peers — are misunderstood and are, therefore, often misinterpreted and misused. Although much has been written about the JIF, some combination of its biases and limita- tions will be true of any citation-based metric. While it is not our contention that bibliometric indices have no value, they should not be applied as performance metrics without a thorough and insightful understanding of their (few?) strengths and (many?) weaknesses. We hope that the articles in this Theme Section will motivate readers to more seriously study the nature of the metrics that are being used to assess them and to consider what their overuse, and misuse, means to us and to future generations of scholars.

Epistemology As Ethics In Research And Policy: The Use of Case Studies

Abstract: This article examines the ethnographic case study in education in the context of policy making with particular emphasis on the practice of research and policy making. The central claim of the article is that it is impossible to establish a transcendental epistemology of the case study on instrumental rationality. Instead it argues for the notion of situated judgement that needs to be made by practitioners in context, practitioners being both researchers and policy makers. In other words, questions about the level of confidence or warrant that can be placed in different sorts of research evidence and findings cannot be answered independently of forming a view about the appropriateness of the policy culture that shapes political decision-making. The article draws a distinction between the general, which is internal to the data as construed by a particular discipline, and the universal, which is the result of embedded human deliberation. This applies to all research findings and not only to case study, although since case study has long had to defend itself against accusations of the lack of generality, it can be a useful starting point for the discussion. This article is not meant to be yet another defence of the case study research genre, although a summary of other defences is offered. Rather it focuses on how use of the case study points to the limits of epistemology as rationality and offers a view of epistemology as ethics.

Judgements during information seeking: a naturalistic approach to understanding the assessment of enough information

Abstract: In this article, theories of human judgement and decision making are reviewed and their use by library and information science researchers examined. A different perspective on judgement and decision making is offered by the field of naturalistic decision making (NDM) and the implications of this approach are considered for an expanded understanding of how judgements and decisions are made during information seeking. This discussion is illustrated by a case from a recent empirical investigation into how judgements of enough information are made in the workplace. The article concludes with a critical evaluation of the NDM approach. It is argued that NDM, a recent development in decision theory, offers a new perspective from which to investigate judgements and decisions during information seeking.

Genderlect and conflict in the Australian construction industry

Abstract: The Australian construction industry is male dominated and highly confrontational. Critical decision and concept mapping methods are employed to explore the connection between these two characteristics by contrasting the cognitive bases of judgement and communication used by male and female workers in hypothetical conflict settings. Results indicate that the Australian construction industry's genderlect is male‐centric and that this perpetuates the relatively high incidence of conflict. Women and men also behave differently in conflicts and in jobs that require them to engage in conflict and confrontation. Consequently, levels of conflict in the Australian construction industry could be reduced by increased female participation and feminizing communicative and behavioural responses to conflict.

Transferability and Naturalistic Generalization: New Generalizability Concepts for Social Science or Old Wine in New Bottles?

Abstract: Interpretative qualitative social science has attempted to distinguish itself from quantitative social science by rejecting traditional or ‘received’ notions of generalization. Traditional concepts of scientific generalization it is claimed are based on a misguided objectivism as to the mechanisms operating in the social world, and particularly the ability of statements to capture such mechanisms in any abstract sense. Instead they propose new versions of the generalizability concept e.g. ‘transferability’, which relies on the context dependent judgement of ‘fit’ between two or more cases instances made by a researcher. This paper argues that the transferability concept, as outlined and argued by interpretativist methodologists, is thoroughly coextensive with notions of generalizability formalized for natural science and naturalistic social science by philosophers and methodologists of science. Therefore, it may be concluded that the interpretativist claim to a break with received scientific traditions is a premature one, at least with regard to the issue of generalization.

Reconciling situational social psychology with virtue ethics

Abstract: For the past four decades, debate has occurred in respect of situational social psychology and virtue ethics. This paper attempts to reconcile this debate. Situationists propose a fragmentation theory of character (each person has a whole range of dispositions, each of which has a restricted situational application) and do not subscribe to a regularity theory of character (behaviour is regulated by long-term dispositions). In order to support this view, they cite a number of experiments. It is proposed that the substantive claims made by situationist social psychologists, for the most part, do not undermine or disagree with an Aristotelian virtue ethics perspective, but stem from a misunderstanding of concepts of moral character, faulty conclusions and generalizations in respect of experimental results. Situationists take a narrow view of character and morality. Evidence from organizational behaviour and managerial research literature supports the view that both situational (organizational) features and inner characteristics (including virtues) are powerful influences and determinants of morally upright and morally deviant behaviour. The role of practical judgement in bridging these views is discussed. As a way forward in reconciling situational social psychology with virtue ethics, the paper proposes an Aristotelian–Thomistic framework to overcome some of the problems associated with inadequate regulative ideals in building a normative moral theory.

To call or not to call: a judgement of risk by pre-registration house officers.

Abstract: Objectives This study set out to answer the following questions. What influences a junior doctor’s response to a judgement call within a clinical setting? What, if any, are the relationships between these influences? Methods This paper describes an interpretivist study based on a grounded theory approach to data analysis. This involved a phased approach to data collection using semi-structured interviews. Analysis was facilitated by observations and group presentations. Participants were doctors in their first year of postgraduate practice who were purposively selected from a range of hospitals in the Northern Deanery. Results The data demonstrated a number of influences on whether junior doctors chose to seek senior assistance. These included the upholding and balancing of tenets that were necessary for ensuring safe practice, and estimating the chance and severity of potential negative consequences to patients, themselves and their teams. In order to make these judgements, junior doctors drew on different forms of knowledge, especially knowledge gained from previous clinical experiences. In judging whether or not to contact a senior, pre-registration house officers (PRHOs) were practising essential clinical attributes, that of independent yet co-operative and discerning practitioners who are able to balance multiple considerations while ensuring patient care. Conclusions This particular judgement of risk, as it was described by those interviewed, was a dynamic process exemplified by the need to create counterbalances between multiple consequences. As a result, no prescriptive action could have allowed PRHOs to deal with the numerous configurations they faced and took into account.

A question of method. The ethics of managing conflicts of interest.

Abstract: Conflicts of interest in biomedical research can endanger the independent judgement of researchers and, in a worst‐case scenario, can result in harm to humans, animals or the environment, or avoidable damage to scientifically validated truths. Highly publicized cases of scientists who have downplayed the risk of passive smoking—while receiving funding from the tobacco industry—or researchers who have questioned anthropogenic global climate change—yet are supported by the coal or oil industries—(LaDou et al , 2007) have attracted persistent, and often appropriate, criticism. A conflict of interest occurs when someone in a position of trust—for example, an academic researcher, lawyer or physician—has competing private and professional interests that make it more difficult to fulfil his or her professional duties without bias. However, a conflict of interest in itself is not necessarily bad, as long as the ‘right’ interests prevail. Nevertheless, conflicts of interest can create an impression of impropriety that, in the long run, might undermine the credibility of an individual or even an entire profession. At a time when policy‐makers, politicians and the public increasingly rely on scientific advice about controversial issues—for example, human embryonic stem cells, genetically modified crops or global climate change—conflicts of interest diminish the public's trust in the independence and unbiased judgement of academic scientists. To maintain trust, researchers must remain visibly trustworthy, which requires a careful and explicit management of conflicts of interest. Amidst growing concerns about the rising prevalence of conflicts of interest (Bekelman et al , 2003) and the attendant risks, various commentators and scientists have proposed several measures to handle conflicts of interest, which range from injunctions for more systematic disclosures to outright bans (Kaiser, 2005). > …a conflict of interest in itself is not necessarily bad, as long as the ‘right’ interests prevail Yet, research funding from private benefactors—who often pursue their own …

Moderation as Judgement Practice: Reconciling System Level Accountability and Local Level Practice

Abstract: This paper is based on the very initial stage of a four year research project focused on teachers' judgements and interpretations of assessment data in the context of standardsdriven reform in Queensland. This major research project is investigating the local level practice of social moderation as a means of developing shared understandings of standards and consistency of judgement amongst teachers in face-to-face and ICT contexts for the purposes of demonstrating system level accountability. The authors draw on a social theory of learning (Wenger, 1998) and assessment research to illustrate the importance of acknowledging that teachers are the primary change agents who, through judgement practices, are best placed to identify important steps for students to improve in their learning. The initial stage of this research reported in this paper suggests that the practice at the local level of social moderation has the potential to fulfil an important role as a process for aiding teachers in ascribing value to student work through the use of standards that help them understand curriculum year level requirements and student achievement within year levels and in so doing attend to system level accountability.

The Majority Judgment Voting Procedure: A Critical Evaluation 1

Abstract: We evaluate critically some of the properties of the Majority Judgement voting procedure recently proposed by Balinski and Laraki for the election of one out of two or more candidates.

Development of reflective judgement in the pre‐doctoral dental clinical curriculum

Abstract: When dental students begin patient care in the clinical curriculum, they are required to move from the well-defined problems of the classroom to the more ambiguous and real life problems encountered in the context of patient care in the clinical setting. This change in learning environment requires development of reflective thinking. Reflective thinking refers to the process of thinking about uncertainty or ill-defined problems. King and Kitchener refer to the outcome of the reflective thinking process as reflective judgement. The purpose of this study was to explore the development of reflective judgement in the initial phase of the clinical curriculum. This exploratory study used a case study approach with qualitative methods. A convenience sample of third year predoctoral dental students (n = 16) volunteered to participate in writing a clinic journal and semi-structured interviews at three time points over a time period of one year. Student compliance in writing clinical journals was poor; therefore the qualitative data was primarily gathered from interview transcripts. The qualitative interview data were analysed using a coding scheme based on King and Kitchener's Reflective Judgement Model of Intellectual Development. The Cronbach alpha was 0.76 for reliability of the coding scheme. Based on the analysis of interview data, the there was an average growth in reflective judgement over the year from Stage 4.89 to 5.59 for an overall change of +0.70. Additional research is needed to explore the growth in reflective judgement over the final year of the clinical curriculum as well as to identify the most effective educational strategies to facilitate growth in reflective judgment.