IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/sysdyn/v31y2015i1-2p46-65.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does analytical thinking improve understanding of accumulation?

Author

Listed:
  • Arash Baghaei Lakeh
  • Navid Ghaffarzadegan

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Arash Baghaei Lakeh & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2015. "Does analytical thinking improve understanding of accumulation?," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 31(1-2), pages 46-65, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:sysdyn:v:31:y:2015:i:1-2:p:46-65
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/sdr.1528
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Horton & David Rand & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 399-425, September.
    2. Tarek Abdel-Hamid & Felix Ankel & Michele Battle-Fisher & Bryan Gibson & Gilberto Gonzalez-Parra & Mohammad Jalali & Kirsikka Kaipainen & Nishan Kalupahana & Ozge Karanfil & Achla Marathe & Brian Mart, 2014. "Public and health professionals’ misconceptions about the dynamics of body weight gain/loss," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(1-2), pages 58-74, January.
    3. Cronin, Matthew A. & Gonzalez, Cleotilde & Sterman, John D., 2009. "Why don't well-educated adults understand accumulation? A challenge to researchers, educators, and citizens," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 116-130, January.
    4. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liang Qi & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2015. "Mathematical knowledge is related to understanding stocks and flows: results from two nations," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 31(3), pages 97-114, July.
    2. Rosa Hendijani, 2021. "Analytical thinking, Little's Law understanding, and stock‐flow performance: two empirical studies," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(2-3), pages 99-125, April.
    3. Martin F. G. Schaffernicht & Stefan N. Groesser, 2016. "A competence development framework for learning and teaching system dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(1), pages 52-81, January.
    4. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    5. Gürsu Aşιk & Zerrin Doğança Küçük, 2021. "Metacognition in action as a possible explanation for stock‐flow failure," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 37(4), pages 253-282, October.
    6. Guido A. Veldhuis & Hubert Korzilius, 2017. "Seeing with the Mind: The Relationship Between Spatial Ability and Inferring Dynamic Behaviour from Graphs," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(6), pages 710-727, November.
    7. Arash Baghaei Lakeh & Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Luis Luna-Reyes, 2016. "The dual-process theory and understanding of stocks and flows," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(3-4), pages 309-331, July.
    8. Sumaiya Haque & Hesam Mahmoudi & Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Konstantinos Triantis, 2023. "Mental models, cognitive maps, and the challenge of quantitative analysis of their network representations," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(2), pages 152-170, April.
    9. Kirsten Davis & Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Jacob Grohs & Dustin Grote & Niyousha Hosseinichimeh & David Knight & Hesam Mahmoudi & Konstantinos Triantis, 2020. "The Lake Urmia vignette: a tool to assess understanding of complexity in socio‐environmental systems," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(2), pages 191-222, April.
    10. Jalali, Mohammad S. & Rahmandad, Hazhir & Bullock, Sally Lawrence & Lee-Kwan, Seung Hee & Gittelsohn, Joel & Ammerman, Alice, 2019. "Dynamics of intervention adoption, implementation, and maintenance inside organizations: The case of an obesity prevention initiative," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 67-76.
    11. Hendijani, Rosa, 2021. "The effect of thinking style on dynamic systems performance: The mediating role of stock-flow understanding," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    12. John Sterman, 2018. "System dynamics at sixty: the path forward," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 5-47, January.
    13. Florian Kapmeier & Roland Maximilian Happach & Meike Tilebein, 2017. "Bathtub Dynamics Revisited: An Examination of Déformation Professionelle in Higher Education," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 227-249, May.
    14. Martina Curran & Enda Howley & Jim Duggan, 2020. "Stock‐flow thinking: A difficult concept to grasp," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 886-891, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    2. Jérôme Hergueux & Nicolas Jacquemet, 2015. "Social preferences in the online laboratory: a randomized experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 251-283, June.
    3. Guido A. Veldhuis & Hubert Korzilius, 2017. "Seeing with the Mind: The Relationship Between Spatial Ability and Inferring Dynamic Behaviour from Graphs," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(6), pages 710-727, November.
    4. Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Richard C. Larson, 2018. "SD meets OR: a new synergy to address policy problems," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 327-353, January.
    5. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & David C. Lane, 2017. "‘Behavioural System Dynamics’: A Very Tentative and Slightly Sceptical Map of the Territory," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 414-423, July.
    6. Martin F. G. Schaffernicht & Stefan N. Groesser, 2016. "A competence development framework for learning and teaching system dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(1), pages 52-81, January.
    7. Florian Kapmeier & Roland Maximilian Happach & Meike Tilebein, 2017. "Bathtub Dynamics Revisited: An Examination of Déformation Professionelle in Higher Education," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 227-249, May.
    8. Arash Baghaei Lakeh & Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Luis Luna-Reyes, 2016. "The dual-process theory and understanding of stocks and flows," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(3-4), pages 309-331, July.
    9. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    10. Cleotilde Gonzalez & Liang Qi & Nalyn Sriwattanakomen & Jeffrey Chrabaszcz, 2017. "Graphical features of flow behavior and the stock and flow failure," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 33(1), pages 59-70, January.
    11. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    12. Liang Qi & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2015. "Mathematical knowledge is related to understanding stocks and flows: results from two nations," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 31(3), pages 97-114, July.
    13. Anastasia Burkovskaya & Adam Teperski & Kadir Atalay, 2022. "Framing and insurance choices," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(2), pages 311-337, June.
    14. Winter, Peter, 2007. "Managerial Risk Accounting and Control – A German perspective," MPRA Paper 8185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. J. Silvestre, & T. Araújo & M. St. Aubyn, 2016. "Economic growth and individual satisfaction in an agent-based economy," Working Papers Department of Economics 2016/19, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    16. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    17. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    18. Lechthaler, Wolfgang & Ring, Patrick, 2021. "Labor force participation, job search effort and unemployment insurance in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 748-778.
    19. Heinicke, Franziska & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Weitzel, Utz, 2019. "The effect of pledges on the distribution of lying behavior: An online experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 136-151.
    20. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:sysdyn:v:31:y:2015:i:1-2:p:46-65. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0883-7066 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.