DDS Related Publications: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

DDS Related Publications (view source)

Revision as of 09:39, 27 March 2020

6,838 bytes added ,  27 March 2020
no edit summary
(Created page with " Galvao, A. et al (2019). Triple helix and its evolution: a systematic literature review. JSTPM. 10 (3): 812–833. Laan, A., Madirolas, G., & De Polavieja, G. G. (2017). R...")
 
No edit summary
Line 96: Line 96:


Turrisi, P.A., Ed.,1997. Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking,State University of New York Press, New York.
Turrisi, P.A., Ed.,1997. Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking,State University of New York Press, New York.
Dye, K. (1999). Dye’s law of requisite evolution of observations. In A. N. Christakis, & K. Bausch (Eds.), How people harness their collective wisdom and power(pp. 166–169). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Dye, K. M., & Conaway, D. S. (1999). Lessons learned from five years of application of the CogniScope. Approach to the food and drug administration. Pennsylvania: CWA Ltd.
Laouris, Y., & Dye, K. (2017). “Democratic” voting without prior exploration of relationships between alternatives favors ineffective actions. Systems Research (submitted)
Özbekhan, Hasan, 2019. The Engagement Axiom. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasan_Özbekhan#Work
Laouris, Y., Laouri, R., & Christakis, A. N. (2008). Communication praxis for ethical accountability: The ethics of the tree of action: Dialogue and breaking down the wall in Cyprus. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 25, 331–348.
Warfield, J. N. (1974a). Developing interconnection matrices in structural modelling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man & Cybernetics, 4(1), 81–87.
Warfield, J. N. (1974b). Toward interpretation of complex structural models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man & Cybernetics, 4(5), 405–417.
Warfield, J. N. (1976). Societal systems: Planning, policy and complexity. New York: Wiley.
Warfield, J. N. (1982). Interpretive structural modeling (ISM). In S. A. Olsen (Ed.), Group planning & problem solving methods in engineering (pp. 155–201). New York: Wiley.
Kayo, M. M., & Ohkami, Y. (2009, July). 5.3. 3 A Method for Analyzing Fundamental Kinesiological Motions of Human Body by Applying Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM). In INCOSE International Symposium (Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 853-864).
Luthra, S., Kumar, V., Kumar, S., & Haleem, A. (2011). Barriers to implement green supply chain management in automobile industry using interpretive structural modeling technique: An Indian perspective. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management (JIEM), 4(2), 231-257.
Singh, M. D., Shankar, R., Narain, R., & Agarwal, A. (2003). An interpretive structural modeling of knowledge management in engineering industries. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 1(1), 28-40.
Kumar, S., Luthra, S., & Haleem, A. (2013). Customer involvement in greening the supply chain: an interpretive structural modeling methodology. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 9(1), 6.
Laouris, Y., & Michaelides, M. (2018). Structured Democratic Dialogue: An application of a mathematical problem structuring method to facilitate reforms with local authorities in Cyprus. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 918-931.
Chronological List of SDDPs by Future Worlds Center and Associates, (2019). www.futureworlds.eu/wiki/Chronological_List_of_SDDPs_by_Future_Worlds_Center_and_Associates
Warfield, J. N. (1973). Binary matrices in system modeling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, (5), 441-449.
ISM Software, (2019). Software that supports the Structured Dialogic Design Process.
futureworlds.eu/wiki/Software_that_supports_the_Structured_Dialogic_Design_Process Last accessed 20 Feb 2019
Galton, F. (1907), “Vox Populi”, Nature, Vol. 75 No. 1949, pp. 450-451.
Dye, K. (2006). Dye’s law of requisite evolution of observations. In A. N. Christakis, & K. Bausch (Eds.), How people harness their collective wisdom and power (pp. 166–169). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Laouris, Y., & Dye, K. (2019). “Democratic” voting without prior exploration of relationships between alternatives favors ineffective actions. Systems Research & Behavioral Science (submitted for publication).
Entwistle, V., Buchan, H., Coulter, A., Jadad, A., 1999. Towards constructive innovation and rigorous evaluation: a new series on methods for promoting and evaluating participation. Health Expectations 2, 75–77.
Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J., 2004. Evaluating public participation exercises: a research agenda. Science, Technology & Human Values 29, 512–556.
Sieber, R., 2006. Public participation geographic information systems: a literature review and framework. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 96, 491–507.
Midgley, G., Cavana, R. Y., Brocklesby, J., Foote, J. L., Wood, D. R., & Ahuriri-Driscoll, A. (2013). Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 229(1), 143-154.
Boyd A, Geerling T, Gregory W, Kagan C, Midgley G, Murray P and Walsh M. (2007). Systemic Evaluation: A Participative, Multi-Method Approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58, 1306-1320.
Shadish W.R., Cook T.D. & Leviton L.C. (1991). 'Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice'. Sage, London.
Quinn Patton M. (2010). 'Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use'. Guilford Press, New York.
Checkland P. & Scholes J. (1990). 'Soft Systems Methodology in Action'. Wiley, Chichester.
Nov, O., Arazy, O., & Anderson, D. (2011, February). Dusting for science: motivation and participation of digital citizen science volunteers. In Proceedings of the 2011 iConference (pp. 68-74). ACM.
Rotman, D., Preece, J., Hammock, J., Procita, K., Hansen, D., Parr, C., ... & Jacobs, D. (2012, February). Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen-science projects. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 217-226). ACM.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1), 68.
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/collective-awareness
Garland, Jr., Theodore (20 March 2015). "The Scientific Method as an Ongoing Process". UC Riverside. Archived from the original on 19 August 2016.
Scientific Method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
Trefethen, F. (1954). A history of operations research. Operations research for management, 1.
Ackermann, F., Bawden, R., Bosch, O., Brocklesby, J., Bryant, J., Buede, D., et al. (2009). Letters to the editor: The case for soft O.R. Operations Research Management Science Today, 36(2), 20–21.
Mingers, J. (2009). Taming hard problems with soft O.R.: "Soft" methodologies tackle messy problems that traditional operations research/management science can’t touch, so why isn’t it promoted in the U.S.? Operations Research Management Science Today, 36(2).
Cronin K, Midgley G and Skuba Jackson L (2014). Issues Mapping: A Problem Structuring Method for Addressing Science and Technology Conflicts. European Journal of Operational Research, 233, 145-158.
Laouris talk at the European parliament on the occasion of launching the ONLIFE Manifesto (Dec 13, 2014). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWRW2sSqVGU
Retrieved from "https://www.dialogicdesignscience.info/w/Special:MobileDiff/18"

Navigation menu