This project aims to help next-generation DRMS research reduce its reliance on technical modeling assumptions that could bias or jeopardize the interpretability and replicability of its findings. The key idea is to leverage heterogeneity of behavior as an asset rather than treating it as a nuisance. Directly connecting theories to variability over time, across contexts, and between decision makers, will better attune management and policy to both commonalities and differences in behavior across hundreds of millions of people, leading to greater societal relevance. The grant also aims to better conceptualize, define, and understand the scope of decision theories. Enhancing theoretical scope means expanding policy coverage: A broader and deeper perspective paves the way for applied DRMS-related professionals to support the well-being of a larger portion of the population at more times and in more contexts.
The project features theoretical, analytical, empirical, and training components. The proposed research develops new tools and models to better understand strength of preference, new open-source public-domain analytics software, novel methods for adapting decision-making experiments dynamically during data collection, and innovative approaches toward conceptualizing, defining, and assessing the scope of decision theories. These innovations both inform and build on empirical work that looks more closely at heterogeneity of behavior and context-dependence. The project considers how ethical/moral foundations interact with evidence weighing, how framing interacts with probabilistic inference, how risk and time synergize, as well as novel ways to compare individual and collective decision making. The training component focuses on next-generation DRMS scholars by training junior scholars in summer schools, following-up with collaborative, research-based training jointly with their home labs, and facilitating dedicated dissemination of the trainees’ research projects.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
