The name is absent



Dealing with Dynamic Systems:...                        33

Beiry and Broadbent (1984, 1987), and Putz-Osterloh (1987), for a critique
see Sanderson (1989). Requiring subjects to predict the next state increases
the amount of knowledge as revealed by QSI. Detailed analyses of so-called
“experimental twins”—pairs of subjects who had to cope with the same
system situations—indicated a high interindividual variability: There were no
significant correlations between the twins’ QSI and QSC scores, thus show-
ing the importance of person-specific ways of information processing.

3.2 Experiment 2: Effects of Eigendynamik

Independent and dependent variables. In this second experiment the effect of
different degrees of “Eigendynamik” was analyzed. Eigendynamik means
that an endogenous variable at time t has an effect on its own state at time
t+l. Thus, parameters a and d from Figure 1 and Eq. (2) to (4) were changed
in three steps: (l)a = l,d = l:a control condition without any Eigendy-
namik; (2) a = 1, d = 0.9: one variable with Eigendynamik; (3) a = 1.1,
d = 0.9: two variables with Eigendynamik. Parameters b = O and c = 0.2
were held constant. Dependent variables were QSC and QSI.

Subjects, material, and procedure. A total of 24 paid males doing their
civil service served as subjects. Under each of the three conditions eight
subjects were run individually. Assuming α = 0.10 and “large effects”
(f = 0.40), the power l-β proves to be at 0.50 in this case for the main effect
(Cohen, 1977). SINUS was used to simulate the system with the charac-
teristics described above. The system had to be manipulated during five
blocks of seven trials each. During the first four blocks subjects could freely
explore the system. During the fifth block all subjects had to reach and
maintain a previously specified goal state.

Results. It was expected that with an increase in Eigendynamik the amount
of acquired knowledge as well as the degree of control over the system
should deteriorate. Analysis of variance revealed only a significant effect for
QSC (F(2,21) = 3.23*; mean QSC for Eigendynamik of 0, 1 and 2 are 3.86,
3.70 and 5.18), but not for QSI (F(2,2i) = 1.12, n.s.).

Discussion. The results show that the degree of knowledge acquisition
does not seem to be influenced by Eigendynamik. In contrast, the control of
the system varied as a function of Eigendynamik. Particularly under the
condition of two variables with Eigendynamik, control of the system turned
out to be much more difficult. This points to the fact that knowledge acqui-
sition and knowledge application require different abilities, which under
certain circumstances lead to a dissociation of both measures.

3.3 Experiment 3: Identification of Side Effects

Independent and dependent variables. In this third experiment the effect of
three different degrees of side effects was analyzed. Side effects were oper-
ationalized as minor effects from one endogenous variable on to another. In



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Three Policies to Improve Productivity Growth in Canada
3. Can we design a market for competitive health insurance? CHERE Discussion Paper No 53
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. Sex-gender-sexuality: how sex, gender, and sexuality constellations are constituted in secondary schools
7. The Institutional Determinants of Bilateral Trade Patterns
8. Washington Irving and the Knickerbocker Group
9. The name is absent
10. DEMAND FOR MEAT AND FISH PRODUCTS IN KOREA
11. Place of Work and Place of Residence: Informal Hiring Networks and Labor Market Outcomes
12. The name is absent
13. Better policy analysis with better data. Constructing a Social Accounting Matrix from the European System of National Accounts.
14. Types of Cost in Inductive Concept Learning
15. Nonparametric cointegration analysis
16. Peer Reviewed, Open Access, Free
17. Dynamic Explanations of Industry Structure and Performance
18. ISSUES AND PROBLEMS OF IMMEDIATE CONCERN
19. The name is absent
20. The name is absent