Advertisement

Lessons Learned and Future Directions

  • Stephen J. Guastello
Chapter
Part of the Evolutionary Economics and Social Complexity Science book series (EESCS, volume 13)

Abstract

This chapter summarizes what has been learned about the dynamics of cognitive workload and fatigue and the extensions of the two cusp models to financial decision making in which an element of risk is involved. Other interesting findings concerning individual differences in response to cognitive workload and fatigue and the performance-variability paradox followed from the study of the two models. The last section of the chapter considers new directions for research that encompass greater levels of complexity that are found in the broader scope of financial decision making.

Keywords

Risk Taking Fund Manager Stock Trader Cognitive Workload Cusp Catastrophe 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Cantwell, R. H., & Moore, P. J. (1996). The development and measurement of individual differences in self-regulatory control and their relationship to academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 500–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carpenter, S. R., Ludwig, D., & Brock, W. A. (1999). Management for eutrophication of lakes subject to potentially irreversible change. Ecological Applications, 9, 751–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). Handbook for the sixteen personality factor questionnaire. Champaign: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.Google Scholar
  4. Gärling, T., Kirchler, E., Lewis, A., & van Raaij, F. (2009). Psychology, financial decision making, and financial crises. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 10, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gomes, O. (2015). A model of animal spirits via sentiment spreading. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 19, 313–343.Google Scholar
  6. Guastello, S. J. (2009). Creativity and personality. In T. Rickards, M. A. Runco, & S. Moger (Eds.), Routledge companion to creativity (pp. 267–278). Abington: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Guastello, S. J., Boeh, H., Shumaker, C., & Schimmels, M. (2012a). Catastrophe models for cognitive workload and fatigue. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 13, 586–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guastello, S. J., Boeh, H., Schimmels, M., Gorin, H., Huschen, S., Davis, E., Peters, N. E., Fabisch, M., & Poston, K. (2012b). Cusp catastrophe models for cognitive workload and fatigue in a verbally-cued pictorial memory task. Human Factors, 54, 811–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Guastello, S. J., Boeh, H., Gorin, H., Huschen, S., Peters, N. E., Fabisch, M., & Poston, K. (2013). Cusp catastrophe models for cognitive workload and fatigue: A comparison of seven task types. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 17, 23–47.Google Scholar
  10. Guastello, A. D., Guastello, S. J., & Guastello, D. D. (2014a). Personality trait theory and multitasking performance: Implications for ergonomic design. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 15, 432–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guastello, S. J., Malon, M., Timm, P., Weinberger, K., Gorin, H., Fabisch, M., & Poston, K. (2014b). Catastrophe models for cognitive workload and fatigue in a vigilance dual-task. Human Factors, 56, 737–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guastello, S. J., Malon, M., Shaline, J., Abraham, J., Hilo, M., Krueger, J., McCormack, N., & Sapnu, E. (2014c). Cognitive workload and fatigue in a vigilance dual task: Miss errors, false alarms, and the impact of wearing biometric sensors while working. Paper presented to the 24th annual international conference of the Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology & Life Sciences, Milwaukee.Google Scholar
  13. Guastello, S. J., Shircel, A., Malon, M., & Timm, P. (2015a). Individual differences in the experience of cognitive workload. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 16, 20–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guastello, S. J., Reiter, K., Malon, M., Timm, P., Shircel, A., & Shaline, J. (2015b). Catastrophe models for cognitive workload and fatigue in N-back tasks. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 19, 173–200.Google Scholar
  15. Guion, R. M. (1998). Assessment, measurement, and prediction for personnel decisions. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1985). Updating Norman’s “adequate taxonomy:” Intelligence and personality dimensions in natural language questionnaires. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 710–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mykytyn, P. P., Jr. (1989). Group embedded figures test (GEFT): Individual differences, performance, and learning effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 951–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rosser, J. B., Jr. (2001). Complex ecological-economic dynamics and environmental policy. Ecological Economics, 37, 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stamovlasis, D., & Tsaparlis, G. (2012). Applying catastrophe theory to an information-processing model of problem solving in science education. Science Education, 96, 392–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marquette UniversityMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations