hig.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 6 of 6
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Ahonen-Jonnarth, Ulla
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Andersson, Hanna
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Bökman, Fredrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    How do people aggregate value? An experiment with relative importance of criteria and relative goodness of alternatives as inputs2022In: Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, ISSN 1057-9214, E-ISSN 1099-1360, Vol. 29, no 3-4, p. 259-273Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The concept of importance of criteria is used as a central element in several decision making contexts, specifically in value aggregation, e.g. as an input to decision support tools. For example, in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) decision makers are asked to estimate how much more important one criterion is than another. However, it is not clear how people understand aggregation models based on importance of criteria in decision making situations. The purpose of this descriptive study is to investigate if people find an aggregation model in simple value aggregation tasks which remind of the way AHP elicits the input. Further, the purpose is to investigate if people's tendency to find a model depends on their cognitive abilities. In an exploratory laboratory experiment, participants assessed which of two alternatives is the best, based on information about the importance of two criteria and how good the two alternatives are compared to each other with respect to these criteria. The results confirm that people are willing to use importance of criteria and goodness of alternatives as input in value aggregations and show three main models for aggregation. More participants with higher numeracy applied a clear model compared to those with lower numeracy. None of the identified models was one of AHP's models but one of them reminded of one of the ways input can be aggregated in the AHP. The three models identified in the experiment are based on lexicographic order, multiplication and a combination of multiplication and addition. How the results could be used in a prescriptive context is discussed in the paper.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 2.
    Andersson, Hanna
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Ahonen-Jonnarth, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Holmgren, Mattias
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Environmental Science.
    Marsh, John E.
    University of Central Lancashire, UK; Luleå University of Technology.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Environmental Science.
    Bökman, Fredrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    What influences people’s tradeoff decisions between CO2 emissions and travel time? An experiment with anchors and normative messages2021In: Frontiers in Psychology, E-ISSN 1664-1078, Vol. 12, article id 702398Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    One of the today’s greatest challenges is to adjust our behavior so that we can avoid a major climate disaster. To do so, we must make sacrifices for the sake of the environment. The study reported here investigates how anchors (extrinsic motivational-free information) and normative messages (extrinsic motivational information) influence people’s tradeoffs between travel time and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the context of car travel and whether any interactions with environmental concern (an intrinsic motivational factor) can be observed. In this study, people received either a CO2, health or no normative message together with either a high anchor, a low anchor, or no anchor. People that received both a high anchor and a CO2 emission normative message were willing to travel for a longer time than those that only received a high anchor. If a low anchor was presented, no differences in willingness to travel for a longer time were found between the three different conditions of normative message groups, i.e., CO2 normative message, health normative message, or no normative message. People with higher concern for the environment were found to be willing to travel for a longer time than those with lower concern for the environment. Further, this effect was strongest when a high anchor was presented. These results suggest that anchors and normative messages are among the many factors that can influence people’s tradeoffs between CO2 emission and travel time, and that various factors may have to be combined to increase their influence over pro-environmental behavior and decisions.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 3.
    Andersson, Hanna
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Bökman, Fredrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Environmental concern: Structure and use for prediction of a tradeoff between CO2 emissions and travel timeManuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
  • 4.
    Andersson, Hanna
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Bökman, Fredrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Wallhagen, Marita
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Environmental Science.
    Holmgren, Mattias
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, Environmental Science.
    Sörqvist, Patrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Education and Business Studies, Department of Business and Economic Studies.
    Ahonen-Jonnarth, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Anchoring effect in judgments of objective fact and subjective preference2021In: Food Quality and Preference, ISSN 0950-3293, E-ISSN 1873-6343, Vol. 88, article id 104102Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The way by which various sources of external information interact in their effects on judgment is rarely investigated. Here, we report two experiments that examine how two sources of external information—an anchor (a reference price) and an eco-label—influence judgments of an objective fact (product price) and a subjective preference (willingness-to-pay for the product). Participants’ price judgments were drawn in the direction of the anchor point, whereas the eco-label resulted in higher judgments of objective fact (Experiment 1) but did not influence subjective preference (Experiment 2). Interestingly, the eco-label seemed to strengthen the effect of the high anchor in judgments of objective fact. Further, participants with higher environmental concern answered a higher price on the subjective preference questions when they received a high anchor, as well as a lower price when they received a low anchor in comparison to the low environmental concern group. This study demonstrates that various external information sources can strengthen each other’s effects on consumer belief about products, while the effects are weaker for consumers’ preferences. The implications of the results for decision making are discussed.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 5.
    Bökman, Fredrik
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Andersson, Hanna
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Sörqvist, Patrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Education and Business Studies, Department of Business and Economic Studies.
    Ahonen-Jonnarth, Ulla
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    The psychology of balancing gains and losses for self and the environment: Evidence from a carbon emission versus travel time tradeoff task2021In: Journal of Environmental Psychology, ISSN 0272-4944, E-ISSN 1522-9610, Vol. 74, article id 101574Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    If human behavior is to become more sustainable, people will have to be willing to sacrifice personal gains and benefits for the sake of sustainability. Decisions will have to involve making tradeoffs between what is good for the self and what is good for sustainability. In the present paper, we studied the psychology of such tradeoffs in the context of a carbon dioxide (CO2) emission versus travel time tradeoff task. The experiment investigated how intrinsic motivational factors (environmental concern), extrinsic motivational information (a normative message) and extrinsic motivation-neutral information (anchors) influence these tradeoffs. The results revealed that extrinsic factors interact in their effects on tradeoffs such that participants were willing to travel for a longer time for the benefit of less CO2 emissions when they were externally motivated by a normative message, but only when this motivational emphasis was combined with a high anchor. Furthermore, this interaction was particularly strong in participants with high environmental concern. We conclude that extrinsic and intrinsic motivational factors interact in their effect on making people willing to accept personal losses in exchange for sustainability gains and that these motivational factors may have to be combined with further extrinsic information to influence decisions.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 6.
    Hjelmblom, Magnus
    et al.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Paasch, Jesper M.
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Geospatial Sciences.
    Paulsson, Jenny
    KTH Royal Institute of Technology.
    Edlund, Marina
    The Swedish Mapping, Cadastral and Land Registration Authority.
    Bökman, Fredrik
    University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Computer and Geospatial Sciences, Decision, Risk and Policy Analysis.
    Towards Automation of the Swedish Property Formation Process: A Structural and Logical Analysis of Property Subdivision2019In: Nordic Journal of Surveying and Real Estate Research, ISSN 1459-5877, E-ISSN 2341-6599, Vol. 14, no 1, p. 29-63Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The ongoing digitalization of public administration and increasedautomation of legal decision-making bears promise to benefit citizens,businesses and other stakeholders through simpler and more efficient civilprocesses, and thus has great impact on the urban planning and buildingprocess. However, automation of decision-making that is directed orconstrained by normative systems such as laws, regulations and policies,requires a detailed and accurate representation of these concepts andtheir constituent parts, and the domain to which they are applied. Thispaper combines two perspectives on formalisation and classification oflegal relations within the urban planning and building domain. In a crossdisciplinaryfashion, the paper analyses and describes a small part of thisdomain at a higher level of abstraction and formalization using two differentanalysis instruments. Using these tools, we perform structural and conceptualas well as logical analyses of two specific snapshots of a fictitious propertysubdivision case in Sweden, focusing on the legal relations between differententities and parties involved in the specific situations. The structural analysisuses the Land Administration Domain Model ISO 19152:2012 standardformalism, and the logical analysis is based on the notion of atomic types oflegal relations. The paper discusses some of the strengths and weaknesses ofthe two tools regarding the formal representation of rights, restrictions andresponsibilities of different parties in the land administration domain, as wellas how the tools relate to each other and how they can be aligned. This papertakes one step towards a deeper understanding of the domain, and identifyareas for future research that may provide better conditions for efficient andtransparent use of geospatial information, and automation of the propertysubdivision process and other related civil processes.

1 - 6 of 6
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf