Analysis of Production and Location Decisions by Means of Multi-Criteria Analysis

During the last few years economists and operations researchers have paid much attention to multi-criteria analysis as a tool in modern decision-making. The basic feature of multi-criteria analysis is the fact that a wide variety of relevant decision aspects can be taken into account without a necessity to translate all these aspects in monetary terms. This article will give a brief survey of these new methods in both a quantitative and in a qualitative sense. After this survey the relevance of multi-criteria analysis for entrepreneurial decisions in the field of production and investments will be exposed. The analysis will be illustrated by means of two examples of entrepreneurial decision-problems, which have been solved by means of multi-criteria analysis

Using hypnosis to disrupt face processing: mirrored-self misidentification delusion and different visual media

Mirrored-self misidentification delusion is the belief that one’s reflection in the mirror is not oneself. This experiment used hypnotic suggestion to impair normal face processing in healthy participants and recreate key aspects of the delusion in the laboratory. From a pool of 439 participants, 22 high hypnotisable participants (“highs”) and 20 low hypnotisable participants were selected on the basis of their extreme scores on two separately administered measures of hypnotisability. These participants received a hypnotic induction and a suggestion for either impaired (i) self-face recognition or (ii) impaired recognition of all faces. Participants were tested on their ability to recognize themselves in a mirror and other visual media – including a photograph, live video, and handheld mirror – and their ability to recognize other people, including the experimenter and famous faces. Both suggestions produced impaired self-face recognition and recreated key aspects of the delusion in highs. However, only the suggestion for impaired other-face recognition disrupted recognition of other faces, albeit in a minority of highs. The findings confirm that hypnotic suggestion can disrupt face processing and recreate features of mirrored-self misidentification. The variability seen in participants’ responses also corresponds to the heterogeneity seen in clinical patients. An important direction for future research will be to examine sources of this variability within both clinical patients and the hypnotic model

Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results

To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer fiveoriginal research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from two separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete one version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: materials from different teams renderedstatistically significant effects in opposite directions for four out of five hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to +0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for two hypotheses, and a lack of support for three hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, while considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.</div

Antineoplastic activity of ASTA Z 7557 (NSC-345842, INN mafosfamide) on transplantable murine tumors

SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Factorial structure of the creative imagination scale as a measure of hypnotic responsiveness: An international comparative study

The factor structure of the Creative Imagination Scale (CIS) of Wilson and Barber (1978) was investigated in two studies by correlating scores on it with scores on the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (Shor & E. Orne, 1962), the Absorption scale of Tellegen and Atkinson (1974), and Sheehans (1967) revision of Betts’ (1909) imagery scale. One of the studies was conducted at the University’ of Queensland in Australia (N = 237), the other at Stanford University in California (N ~ 92). The major finding, consistent in both investigations, was that two factors accounted for the major portion of the variance, one factor designated as a Hypnotic Performance factor, the other designated as an Absorption/Imagination factor. The CIS was weighted highly on both factors, the data bearing on earlier claims that CIS represents a single-factor scale