A nurse in a neonatal intensive care is providing primary care for a baby, and is uncomfortable about another baby, which seems to be having subtle color changes. Sometimes the baby will fade a bit; sometimes it will come back to healthy pink.
She remarks the fact to the primary nurse, who agrees.
Suddenly the baby turns blue. The monitor shows that his blood pressure has bottomed out completely; his heart rate drops, then goes back to 80 beats/minute.
Afterwards, the team discusses why the heart monitor still displayed activity. As it turns out, the monitor responds to electrical activity, and the heart’s electrical activity was fine, even though its mechanical activity was suppressed by the air pressure.
The mystery #1 How did the nurse know immediately that it was a heart problem? What theory could explain it? Be the mind!
As he runs towards the man, he makes his diagnosis. He sees from the amount of blood surrounding the man that he has an open artery, and from the dishcloths around the arm which artery is open.
Next comes the decision on how to treat the man; so he applies firm pressure, and starts to look for other injuries (neck?) which would prevent him from moving the man. But there’s no time for such thing; the man is dying within minutes.
Soelberg teached his students at MIT Sloan School of Management how to perform the rational choice strategy, in which the decision maker:
Identifies a set of options;
Identifies the way of evaluating these options;
Weights each evaluation dimension;
Does the rating;
Picks the option with the highest score.
Soelberg taught his students how to apply the rational choice strategy
And in his PhD thesis he studied the decision strategies his students used to select their jobs as they graduated.
But he was wrong; his students did not systematically compare options. Soelberg found that they were using their gut feelings, and he could predict with 87% accuracy their ultimate choice, three weeks before they did their decision .
“Decision-makers recognize the situation as typical and familiar, and proceed to take action. They [immediately] understand
What types of goals make sense,
Which cues are important,
What to expect next,
Immediate access to a typical course of action .
Recognition-Primed Decision Model no yes Perceived as typical [Prototype or analog] Expectancies Relevant Cues Plausible Goals Recognition has four byproducts Action 1...n Modify yes,but Evaluate Course of Action Will it Work? Implement Course of Action Evaluate Action (n) [Mental Simulation] Experience the Situation in a Changing Context
Key Features of RPD Model 1. First option is usually workable Not random generation and selective retention 2. Serial generation/evaluation of options Not comparative evaluation 3. Satisficing Not optimizing 4. Evaluation through mental simulation Not MAUA or Decision Analysis 5. Focus on elaborating and improving options Not choosing between options 6. Focus on situation awareness Not CoAs 7. DM primed to act Not waiting to complete the analysis
George Soros, according to his son, makes critical decisions in the stock market because "his back starts killing him." His intuition, in other words, has a physical manifestation. Flavia Cymbalista has written about this in more detail: According to Soros, his theory informs his decisions, and his body gives him the signals. The making of a self-reinforcing trend brings water to his mouth. The need for a portfolio shift makes his back hurt. His body "knows" he needs to take action, or to take careful note of a situation before his intellect can grasp it É Realizing that logic alone cannot be the basis for successful speculation led me to study bodily knowing in my post-doctoral research. There's a whole side to our embodied, experiential knowledge that computers don't have and that the "rational economic man" in models most economists construct doesn't have either. Our bodies "know" the situations we meet in life and how they can unfold. I found that physical experience has much more organized information about the world than the usual understanding of the body assumes.
Apparently, Soros is not alone in this. Here is Bob Woodward, in "Maestro" (p. 120) talking about Alan Greenspan, the legendary chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve: "I've been in the economic forecasting business since 1948, and I've been on Wall Street since 1948, and I am telling you I have a pain in the pit of my stomach." He noted that in the past he had listened to his instincts and that they had been right. The pain in the stomach was a physical awareness Greenspan had experienced many times. He felt he had a deeper understanding of the issueÑa whole body of knowledge in his head and a whole value systemÑthan he was capable of stating at that moment. If he was about to say something that wasn't right, he would feel it before he was intellectually aware of the problem. It was this physical feeling, this sense in the stomach, that he believed kept him from making dangerous or absurd statements that might appear on the front page of the newspapers. At times, he found his body sensed danger before his head. As he walked down the street there would be an approaching car, and his body knew to stay out of its way before his head."
In 1983, The Getty Museum was offered a kourus dating from the 6 th century BC by art dealer Gianfranco Becchina. The price bordered on 10 Million dollars, but the statue looked almost perfectly preserved.
Univ. California Geologist Stanley Margolis analyzed it using:
X-ray diffraction; and
The results indicated a statue made of dolomite marble from the island of Thasos. The statue was covered with a thin layer of calcite—and dolomite can only turn into calcite over the course of hundreds or thousands of years after exposure. Margolis told the Getty that the statue was old, not some contemporary fake.
After 14 months of investigation, the kouros was acquired in 1986, for a reported $7 to $9 million.
New York Times: front-page news
The art journal The Burlington Magazine ran a enthusiastic piece: “[…] the kouros expresses the confident vitality that is characteristic of the best of his brothers. […] God or man, he embodies all the radiant energy of the adolescence of modern art.”
Scientific American ran a piece called “Authenticating Ancient Marble Sculpture”
“ One of the most embarrassing legacies of the Getty’s freewheeling past is the statue of a kouros, a naked youth, supposedly from the sixth century BC.
Th[e origin document, a] letter is a forgery; it bears a postal code that came into use only in the 1970s. In 1990, an art historian compared the Getty’s kouros to a torso allegedly made in Rome in 1985 by an Italian forger. The Getty acquired the torso, made its own comparison, and could not decide if the kouros was genuine or not.
To this day, the enigma continues.”
www. getty .edu/art/ getty guide/artObjectDetails?artobj=12908 Around US$ 8.000.000,00
“ You could argue that perhaps the decision makers were comparing options but not consciously. We have no way of knowing whether this might be true. Still, you have to be careful about making that argument because when you do, the burden of proof shifts from me to you. I cannot prove that something is not happening. I can tell you I do not believe decision makers are comparing options since they do not report it, there usually was not much time for it, and I can explain their actions in other ways. If you want to claim they are subconsciously comparing options, then the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence.”
Bell curve on the number of primed potential actions
>1 speech errors; fleeting hesitations
<1 unsatisfactory feeling concerning situation; raising of anxiety; feeling that something must be done but no idea of what
Recognition-Primed Decision Model: BOX AND ARROW PSYCHOLOGY? no yes Perceived as typical [Prototype or analog] Expectancies Relevant Cues Plausible Goals Recognition has four byproducts Action 1...n Modify yes,but Evaluate Course of Action Will it Work? Implement Course of Action Evaluate Action (n) [Mental Simulation] Experience the Situation in a Changing Context