IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i16p10424-d894029.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-Making Mechanism of Joint Activities for the Elderly and Children in Integrated Welfare Facilities: A Discussion Based on “Motivation–Constraint” Interaction Model

Author

Listed:
  • Wenjing Luo

    (Institute of Architectural Design and Theoretical Research, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Zhi Qiu

    (Institute of Architectural Design and Theoretical Research, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
    Center for Balance Architecture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Yurika Yokoyama

    (Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan)

  • Shengyuan Zheng

    (The District Government of Binjiang, Hangzhou 310052, China)

Abstract

In China, joint activities for the elderly and children in integrated welfare facilities lack systematic decision procedures. By learning from the “leisure constraint” theory, the study puts forward six influencing indicators of motivation and constraint in the aspects of preliminary coordination, activity space and effect. By using semi-structured interviews and questionnaire surveys analyzed by deviation value computation, the study analyzes the evaluation value of influencing factors in the decision procedure of potential activity cases, where administrators and nurses act as two decision makers. Further, it discusses the decision-making mechanism based on the “motivation–constraint” interaction model. Firstly, it analyzes the dominant forces in the decision procedure, which are “motivation oriented”, “negotiation oriented” and “constraint oriented”. Secondly, it reveals that administrators and nurses as two decision makers tend to give positive motivation evaluations and deliberative constraints evaluations, respectively. Additionally, it analyzes the decision procedures of activities with distinct feasibility differentiation. Thirdly, it positions the levels of occurrence potential as “should occur”, “occurred but should be improved”, “potentially could occur” and “hard to occur”. Eventually, it analyzes the requirements and potential for joint activities under different service modules, which provides a theoretical foundation for the systematic planning and development of the joint activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenjing Luo & Zhi Qiu & Yurika Yokoyama & Shengyuan Zheng, 2022. "Decision-Making Mechanism of Joint Activities for the Elderly and Children in Integrated Welfare Facilities: A Discussion Based on “Motivation–Constraint” Interaction Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:16:p:10424-:d:894029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/10424/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/10424/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sterman, J.D., 2006. "Learning from evidence in a complex world," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 505-514.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    3. Jie Lu & Guangquan Zhang & Da Ruan & Fengjie Wu, 2007. "Fuzzy Group Decision Making," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Multi-Objective Group Decision Making Methods, Software and Applications with Fuzzy Set Techniques, chapter 10, pages 207-227, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Jie Lu & Guangquan Zhang & Da Ruan & Fengjie Wu, 2007. "Group Decision Making," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Multi-Objective Group Decision Making Methods, Software and Applications with Fuzzy Set Techniques, chapter 3, pages 39-51, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Zhi Qiu & Yi Hua & Binwei Yun & Zhu Wang & Yi Zhou, 2023. "Public Space Planning in Urban Resettlement Community in China: Addressing Diverse Needs of Rural Migrants through Function Programming Based on Architectural Planning Theory," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Wanke, Peter Fernandes & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel José & Moreira Antunes, Jorge Junio & Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz & Roubaud, David & Sobreiro, Vinicius Amorim & Santibanez Gonzalez‬, Erne, 2021. "An original information entropy-based quantitative evaluation model for low-carbon operations in an emerging market," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    2. Eduardo Fernández & Claudia Gómez-Santillán & Nelson Rangel-Valdez & Laura Cruz-Reyes, 2022. "Group Multi-Objective Optimization Under Imprecision and Uncertainty Using a Novel Interval Outranking Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 945-994, October.
    3. Zhang, Ruijun & Lu, Jie & Zhang, Guangquan, 2011. "A knowledge-based multi-role decision support system for ore blending cost optimization of blast furnaces," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(1), pages 194-203, November.
    4. Fang Liu & Mao-Jie Huang & Cai-Xia Huang & Witold Pedrycz, 2022. "Measuring consistency of interval-valued preference relations: comments and comparison," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 371-399, March.
    5. Cebi, Selcuk & Ilbahar, Esra & Atasoy, Aylin, 2016. "A fuzzy information axiom based method to determine the optimal location for a biomass power plant: A case study in Aegean Region of Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 894-907.
    6. Guangquan Zhang & Jie Lu, 2010. "Fuzzy bilevel programming with multiple objectives and cooperative multiple followers," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 403-419, July.
    7. Pham Thanh Vu & Vo Quang Minh & Phan Chi Nguyen & Tran Van Dung & Nguyen The Cuong & Ngo Thi Phong Lan, 2020. "Estimating the criteria affected to agricultural production: case of Chau Thanh A district, Vietnam," Asian Journal of Agriculture and rural Development, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 10(1), pages 463-472, June.
    8. Borawska Anna, 2017. "Cognitive Neuroscience Tools in Economic Experiments Investigating the Decision Making Process," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 159-169, June.
    9. Harrison Mutikanga & Saroj Sharma & Kalanithy Vairavamoorthy, 2011. "Multi-criteria Decision Analysis: A Strategic Planning Tool for Water Loss Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(14), pages 3947-3969, November.
    10. R. O. Parreiras & P. Ya. Ekel & D. C. Morais, 2012. "Fuzzy Set Based Consensus Schemes for Multicriteria Group Decision making Applied to Strategic Planning," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 153-183, March.
    11. Adriana Galderisi & Andrea Ceudech & Massimiliano Pistucci, 2008. "A method for na-tech risk assessment as supporting tool for land use planning mitigation strategies," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 46(2), pages 221-241, August.
    12. Liu, Fang & Chen, Ya-Ru & Zhou, Da-Hai, 2023. "A two-dimensional approach to flexibility degree of XOR numbers with application to group decision making," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 267-287.
    13. Jaafari, Abolfazl & Najafi, Akbar & Melón, Mónica García, 2015. "Decision-making for the selection of a best wood extraction method: An analytic network process approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 200-209.
    14. Samari, Davood & Azadi, Hossein & Zarafshani, Kiumars & Hosseininia, Gholamhossein & Witlox, Frank, 2012. "Determining appropriate forestry extension model: Application of AHP in the Zagros area, Iran," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 91-97.
    15. Torgler, Benno & Schneider, Friedrich & Schaltegger, Christoph A., 2007. "With or Against the People? The Impact of a Bottom-Up Approach on Tax Morale and the Shadow Economy," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt6331x6vz, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    16. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    17. Christina Leuker & Thorsten Pachur & Ralph Hertwig & Timothy J. Pleskac, 2019. "Do people exploit risk–reward structures to simplify information processing in risky choice?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 76-94, August.
    18. Jae Wook Yoo & Richard Reed & Shung Jae Shin & David J. Lemak, 2009. "Strategic Choice and Performance in Late Movers: Influence of the Top Management Team's External Ties," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 308-335, March.
    19. Giovanni Calice & Levent Kutlu & Ming Zeng, 2021. "Understanding US firm efficiency and its asset pricing implications," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 803-827, February.
    20. Westerhoff, Frank H. & Dieci, Roberto, 2006. "The effectiveness of Keynes-Tobin transaction taxes when heterogeneous agents can trade in different markets: A behavioral finance approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 293-322, February.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:16:p:10424-:d:894029. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.