1 / 6

Interactive Choice

Interactive Choice. Jan Crow & Tim Weninger Judgment & Decision Making Conference 2008. Building Interactive Choice. Focus of talk Research need → application Research question: creating solutions, dynamic decisions Web-pages generated “on the fly” Not AI

leala
Download Presentation

Interactive Choice

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interactive Choice Jan Crow & Tim Weninger Judgment & Decision Making Conference 2008

  2. Building Interactive Choice • Focus of talk • Research need → application • Research question: creating solutions, dynamic decisions • Web-pages generated “on the fly” • Not AI • Predefined process and format/style • Server application • Cost/benefit trade off • “If you can dream it, you can build it”(Weninger, 2005)

  3. Introduction/Instructions/ Informed Consent Cascading Style Sheet Assigns unique ID Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Attribute 1..6 Attr. Level Product 1 Product 2 Product 3 Condition 1 Same Process Condition 3 Same Process Replication 2 Attribute 1..6 Attr. Level Product 1 Product 2 Product 3 Replication 3 Attribute 1..6 Attr. Level Closing Questions/ Debriefing Statement Randomization with replacement Randomization without replacement Data placed in pre-defined database Product 1 Product 2 Product 3 Replication 1 Error checking

  4. Cost Upfront costs Development Server Assistance Length of study Benefit Alternative methods of presenting stimuli Diverse populations Reduced participation pool restrictions Once basic structure is in place, easy to revise Cost/Benefit Trade Off

  5. Acknowledgements • Decision Research Group, Kansas State University • Judgment Decision Making Lab, Ohio State University • National Science Foundation, DRMS • Advanced Training Institute in Social Psychology Experiments via the WWW

More Related