Base Modeling, decisions

[From Rick Marken (980821.1510)]

Marc Abrams (980821.1517) --

When you say "capture what happens when a teacher controls the
locations of a disruptive student?" are you refering to capturing
what the _other_ students in the class are experiencing?


Are you capturing how the student is dealing internally with
this conflict?

Yes. The model shows the behavior of the variables (perception,
error, reference, output) in the "victim" (student).

Are you capturing what the teacher is experiencing _outside_ of
the specific set of actions?

I don't understand. Are you asking whether I am modeling other
perceptions the teacher is controlling besides the perception of
the student's behavior? If so, no.

How could this alter what she might perceive and do?

Are you asking how systems controlling other perceptions could
alter the reference for the system controlling the behavior of
the kid? If so, these other systems could vary the reference
for the kid's behavior in whatever way they needed it to change.

Could you be more specific on _how_ the model deals with _these_

I tried. Was it any help?

Bruce Gregory (980821.1700 EDT) --

You'll agree that this "control of location" is characteristic
of all social systems?

Not really.

I assume then that you are making the point that RTP is indeed
part of a social system

I wasn't making a point about RTP. I was trying to model a teacher
controlling the location of a disruptive kid.


The simple spreadsheet model accounts for this data.


But only the data dealing with the physical location of the
student, no?

No. All data dealing with all aspects of the teacher's control of
the location of a disruptive student; the teacher's reference for
the location of the disruptive kid, the meanas by which the
teacher resists disturbances to this variable, etc.


Execpt that I would say that, once you have exposed
the teacher's controlling by showing that the teacher will
physically eject a kid who does not go voluntarily to the RTC
room, you know that the teacher is controlling, whether or not
she ever again has to struggle to get another kid to the RTC.


I don't follow this. Suppose she had a change of heart and
vowed never to physically eject a kid again. Why would we say
that she is still controlling?

This is an interesting point. I suppose it's always possible
that immediately after testing for control of a perception a
person could stop controlling that perception. For example, the
teacher might stop controlling for keeping disruptive kids out
of class as soon as she had ejected one kid; the driver might
stop controlling for being in his lane as soon as he had to
move the wheel to compenstae for a gust of wind. Maybe that's
one reason why we don't test for control with a single, impulse
disturbance. Maybe it would be best to have several kids disrupt
and refuse to leave at different times over the course of a week.

Jeff Vancouver (980821.1650 EST) --

Bill had asked for some studies that revealed the deviations
between human "decision making behavior" and an average
weighted model...I emailed my colleague in decision making
and she wrote:

With regards to a choice study, there are a number of them...I
think the Busemeyer and Townsend Psych. Rev. paper presents pretty
interesting choice data (eg. Tables 6 and 7), plus the effects on
decision times. Tversky's 1969 paper on the intransitivity of
choices is a classic and the data appear in the paper itself in
a table. Kahneman and Tversky's Prospect Theory paper in
Psychometrika also has all the relevant choice proportions that
deal with the many effects they were trying to account with PT...
I think dealing with these would be start.

Bill, I can make copies of these articles and send them to you

Great! How about copying the relevant parts of these tables into
an e-mail to the net?

I forget what the point of all this was but maybe you could
put this in context when you post the data.




Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: