Decision Augmentation Interface for Value-Aware Option Selection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current decision-making models, such as Expected Utility Theory, fail to integrate instrumental and value rationality, leading to inaccurate decision-making outside of economic and business contexts, particularly in medical fields where they result in problem-centered care that neglects patient values and preferences.
Innovation Solution
A decision-making augmentation system that enhances short-term memory and guides users through considering both instrumental and value rationality by prompting input on pros and cons, degrees of motivation, and long-term goals, using a user interface to derive and present the best option while allowing for reconsideration and re-framing of decisions.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If Expected Utility Theory is used for decision-making, then economic and business decisions can be made with quantifiable goals and risk, but the model fails to integrate value rationality and becomes inaccurate in medical and personal decision contexts
Solution Approach 1:
The patent creates a universal decision-making framework that integrates both instrumental rationality (means-end effectiveness) and value rationality (moral/ethical correctness) into a single model. This allows the system to adapt to different decision contexts including medical, personal, and professional domains, resolving the contradiction between measurement precision in economic contexts and adaptability across diverse decision-making scenarios
2Productivity
If problem-centered care is provided in medical decisions, then medical efficiency is improved, but patient values and preferences are neglected leading to inadequate patient participation
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the decision-making process into distinct components: instrumental rationality assessment (efficiency, effectiveness) and value rationality assessment (patient values, preferences, moral considerations). This segmentation allows the system to maintain medical efficiency through structured evaluation while simultaneously incorporating patient participation through dedicated value assessment, resolving the contradiction between productivity and ease of operation
3Loss of information
If multiple options and details are presented to the decision maker, then comprehensive decision analysis is achieved, but cognitive overload increases making it difficult for the brain to retain and process all information
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary computational system that bridges the gap between comprehensive information and human cognitive limitations. This intermediary processes, organizes, and integrates multiple options and details, reducing cognitive overload while maintaining information completeness. The system acts as a mediator between the full set of decision parameters and the decision maker's processing capacity
Data Source
AI summary
A system includes a processor to: receive a description of a current decision that includes selecting an option; repeatedly display the description; for each option, receive an indication of selection of scale text specifying a degree of intensity or intensity for achieving or avoiding a possible outcome of the option, and derive an overall motivation based on the at least one selection; identify a best option based on the overall motivations; display the best option; compare the overall motivation of the best option to a threshold; in response to being less than the threshold, display a warning and a prompt for the operator to further consider the current decision; compare the overall motivation of the best option to the others; and in response to not exceeding all other overall motivations, by at least a threshold of difference, present a proximity warning and the prompt.