In computational social choice, the complexity of changing the outcome of elections via manipulation, bribery, and various control actions, such as adding or deleting candidates or voters, has been studied intensely. Endriss et al. [13, 14] initiated the complexity-theoretic study of problems related to judgment aggregation. We extend their results on manipulation to a whole class of judgment a...

Psychological research shows that daily judgment and reasoning are biased in predictable ways. Three common problems lead to judgment bias, namely, the 'compared to what' problem, the 'seek and ye shall find' problem and the selective memory problem. The scientific method was developed as an inferential safeguard for the inaccuracy of everyday judgment. Unfortunately, the scientific method is n...

Presence and reality judgment are two important variables to take into account in the virtual reality field. So far, scientific literature has paid (and pays) attention to the construct of presence, trying to offer assessment measures that could seize such an elusive concept. However, the concept of reality judgment has received less attention, and, frequently, it has been subsumed into the con...

We study the computational complexity of several scenarios of strategic behavior for the Kemeny procedure in the setting of judgment aggregation. In particular, we investigate (1) manipulation, where an individual aims to achieve a better group outcome by reporting an insincere individual opinion, (2) bribery, where an external agent aims to achieve an outcome with certain properties by bribing...

Psychological literature exposes a number of biases that can influence one’s judgment (e.g., pathology bias, confirmatory bias, hindsight bias, misestimation of covariance, decision heuristics, false consensus effect, and over-confidence in clinical judgment). Clinical judgment, the subjective method of arranging client data to establish a diagnosis and a treatment plan, can also be biased and ...

Distributive systems consisting of autonomous and intelligent components need to be able to reason and make decisions based on the information these components share. Judgment aggregation investigates how individual judgments on logically connected propositions can be aggregated into a collective judgment on the same propositions. It is the case that seemingly reasonable aggregation procedures ...

A familiar adage in the philosophy of science is that general hypotheses are better supported by varied evidence than by uniform evidence. Several studies suggest that young children do not respect this principle, and thus suffer from a defect in their inductive methodology. We argue that the diversity principle does not have the normative status that psychologists attribute to it, and should b...

Judgment aggregation theory generalizes social choice theory by having the aggregation rule bear on judgments of all kinds instead of barely judgments of preference. The paper briefly sums it up, privileging the variant that formalizes judgment by a logical syntax. The theory derives from Kornhauser and Sager’s doctrinal paradox and Pettit’s discursive dilemma, which List and Pettit turned into...

In this paper, a comprehensive algorithm is developed to analyze the sensitivity of hierarchical decision models (HDM), including the analytic hierarchy process and its variants, to single and multiple changes in the local contribution matrices at any level of the decision hierarchy. The algorithm is applicable to all HDM that use an additive function to derive the overall contribution vector. ...

We investigated how perspective-taking might be used to overcome bias and improve advice-based judgments. Decision makers often tend to underweight the opinions of others relative to their own, and thus fail to exploit the wisdom of others. We tested the idea that decision makers taking the perspective of another person engage a less egocentric mode of processing of advisory opinions and thereb...