DFG-Förderung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Fakten und Mythen zur Förderpraxis

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 99-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiane Joerk ◽  
Achim Wambach
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Research Association ◽  
Excellence Initiative ◽  
German Research ◽  
Party Funding ◽  
German Research Association

AbstractAcademics in the field of economic sciences are increasingly expected to solicit (research based) third party funding, even in competition with other disciplines. The recent Excellence Initiative in Germany, in which economic sciences have performed disappointingly, has shown this pressure quite plainly. This article gives an overview of the main funding programmes of the DFG (German Research Association), the assessment and decision-making process in these programmes and discusses the position of economics in the DFG funding context.

Decision-Making Process in Intermodal Transportation

2000 ◽  
Vol 1707 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios A. Tsamboulas ◽  
Seraphim Kapros
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Intermodal Transportation ◽  
Transportation Services ◽  
Cost Criterion ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Logistic Support ◽  
A Minor

A methodological framework with models is provided, which correlates behavioral and perceptual issues related to the use of intermodal transportation with the commonly used physical and economic criteria in modal choice approaches. With factor analysis, key variables and common decision patterns related to the choice of intermodal transportation are identified. Factor analysis is applied to capture the actors’ perception of the importance of variables affecting the decision-making process. With multiple regression analysis, models simulating the decision-making process are developed for actor groups, utilizing actual quantitative data of cost and performance of intermodal transportation services. Three decision patterns and the respective actor groups’ profiles are identified. The first group consists of actors who decide almost exclusively according to the cost criterion; these actors are intensive users of intermodal transportation. The second group has actors who decide according to both quality and cost criteria; using intermodal transportation by this actor group constitutes a minor portion of its total transport volumes. The third group consists of actors who are influenced in their decisions by specific logistics needs, beyond the physical transportation activity itself. The offer of third-party end-haul operations or refrigerated storage areas is an example of such services, necessitating specific logistic support. For each actor group a model is developed, which associates values of the quantitative variables affecting the decision-making process with the share of intermodal transportation in the total volume of transport handled by the group. The application of the model defines the extent to which changes in the values of relevant variables may shift a decision toward the use of intermodal transportation.

scholarly journals Patient Decision Making Prior to Radical Prostatectomy

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Çağatay Doğan ◽  
Hamza M. Gültekin ◽  
Sarper M. Erdoğan ◽  
Hamdi Özkara ◽  
Zübeyr Talat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Telephone Interview ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Treatment Alternatives ◽  
Critical Aspects

The current study assessed the decision-making process before surgery in prostate cancer patients. A structured telephone interview was conducted by an independent third party in 162 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for prostate cancer. Responders revealed that details regarding diagnosis and treatment alternatives were withheld from a significant number of patients. Radiation and active surveillance were presented as alternative options to surgery in 57 (39%) and 20 (14%) of responders, respectively. Twenty-six (18%) patients reported not being informed regarding potential surgical side effects. Patients were not active participants in critical aspects of decision making in 61 (42%) of the cases. Being inadequately informed and more frequent visits to the urologist appeared to make decisions more difficult. Treatment regret was reported by 23 (16%) of the patients who underwent surgery and was more common when the patient was not involved in the decision or was inadequately informed. As such, shared decision making should replace paternalism when managing patients with localized prostate cancer in urologic practice.

scholarly journals De derde partij in shared decision making

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-175
Author(s):  
Roosmaryn Pilgram ◽  
Lotte van Poppel
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Coalition Building ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Third Party

Abstract Regelmatig nemen patiënten een begeleider mee naar medische consulten. Het verloop van shared decision making (SDM) in consulten met drie partijen heeft tot nu toe echter weinig aandacht gekregen. In deze studie wordt nagegaan welke invloed de derde partij kan hebben op het beslisproces. Daartoe specificeren we de rollen die deze partij op zich kan nemen en bespreken we, vanuit een pragma-dialectisch perspectief, hoe deze rollen zich vertalen naar rollen binnen een discussie. Tot slot zetten we op basis van voorbeelden uiteen hoe deze rollen tot uiting kunnen komen in het besluitvormingsproces. In een consult met drie partijen blijken vanuit argumentatief oogpunt twaalf complexe discussiesituaties te kunnen ontstaan, afhankelijk van de aard van het geschil, eventuele coalitievorming en de rollen die de partijen op zich nemen. In een aantal discussiesituaties kan de derde partij een actieve rol spelen en zodoende deelnemen aan het besluitvormingsproces. Alle drie partijen kunnen daarnaast anderen bij de discussie betrekken (bijvoorbeeld door hun mening te vragen) of een coalitie suggereren (bijvoorbeeld door in de wij-vorm te spreken). Indien een derde partij een coalitie suggereert, kan dit enerzijds SDM ten goede komen, doordat de begeleider de patiënt in het besluitvormingsproces steunt. Anderzijds kan dit ook het besluitvormingsproces bemoeilijken wanneer de derde partij (bewust of onbewust) ten onrechte namens de patiënt spreekt. Op eenzelfde wijze kan een derde partij meer of minder constructieve bijdragen leveren aan de besluitvorming door standpunten of argumenten te baseren op de eigen (vermeende) expertise. Abstract The third party in shared decision making. The role of extra participants in discussions between health professionals and patients Patients often bring along a companion to medical consultations, which ideally involve shared decision making (SDM). The way in which SDM proceeds in consultations with three parties has, nonetheless, so far received little attention. In this study, we analyse how the presence of a third party can affect the decision making process. To do so, we specify the roles that this party can fulfil, and discuss, using the pragma-dialectical framework, how these roles relate to discussion roles. Lastly, based on a qualitative analysis of a number of examples we illustrate how the roles that a third party could fulfil can be expressed in actual medical decision making. From an argumentative perspective, twelve complex discussion situations could arise from the presence of three parties, depending on the nature of the disagreement, possible coalition building, and the roles that the parties fulfil. In a number of discussion situations, the third party can play an active role and thus take part in the decision making process itself. All three parties could additionally invite others to participate in the discussion (for instance, by asking for their opinion) or suggest that a coalition has been formed (for instance, by using inclusive ‘we’). A third party suggesting that a coalition exists can further SDM, as the companion could thereby support the patient in the decision making process. However, this could also hinder the decision making process if the third party (consciously or unconsciously) unjustifiably speaks on behalf of the patient. In a similar vein, a third party could contribute in a more constructive or less constructive manner to the decision making process by basing standpoints or arguments on their own (supposed) expertise.

scholarly journals INSTRUMENT FOR LONG-TERM MEASUREMENT OF SUSPENDED MATTER (SILT GAUGE)

1972 ◽  
Vol 1 (13) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
Harald Gohren ◽  
Hans Laucht
Keyword(s):  
Suspended Matter ◽  
Financial Support ◽  
Suspended Sediments ◽  
Research Association ◽  
German Research ◽  
Measuring Tube ◽  
Long Term Measurement ◽  
German Research Association ◽  
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

With financial support by the German Research Association (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) an instrument for automatic long-term measurement of suspended matter has been developed by the authors. It works on a settling method. A sample of 20 1 of water is pumped into a conical settling bottle every hour. The suspended sediments settling in a measuring tube at the bottom of the bottle are recorded by a camera. The device called "Silt Gauge" is intended for long-term measurements in shallow coastal water.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document