[ View menu ]

June 2, 2008

Society for Medical Decision Making (SMDM) 30th Annual Meeting

Filed in Conferences ,SJDM ,SJDM-Conferences
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

SMDM 2008, OCTOBER 19-22, 2008, PHILADELPHIA

We are pleased to invite you to submit an abstract to the 30th Annual Meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, being held in Philadelphia this October. The meeting theme is “Comparative Effectiveness Research.”

Authors of accepted abstracts will be invited to present their work at the SMDM 30th Annual Meeting, October 19 – 22, 2008 in Philadelphia, PA. Accepted abstracts will be published online in Medical Decision Making, SMDM’s peer-reviewed scientific journal.

The deadline for abstract submissions is Friday, June 6, 2008 at 11:59 p.m. EDT. For more information about abstracts or to submit an abstract, go to abstracts. To learn more about the SMDM 30th Annual Meeting, go to meeting. To make hotel reservations for the meeting, go to reservations.

Meeting Co-Chairs:
Sandy Schwartz, MD and Seema Sonnad, PhD

Scientific Review Committee Co-Chairs:
Heather Taffet Gold, PhD, and Lisa Prosser, PhD

May 30, 2008

How lemonade changes the decision made

Filed in Research News ,SJDM
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

BLOOD SUGAR AND HEURISTIC USE

Lemonade

Now this is interesting (*):

ABSTRACT:

This experiment used the attraction effect to test the hypothesis that ingestion of sugar can reduce reliance on intuitive, heuristic-based decision making. In the attraction effect, a difficult choice between two options is swayed by the presence of a seemingly irrelevant “decoy” option. We replicated this effect and the finding that the effect increases when people have depleted their mental resources performing a previous self-control task. Our hypothesis was based on the assumption that effortful processes require and consume relatively large amounts of glucose (brain fuel), and that this use of glucose is why people use heuristic strategies after exerting self-control. Before performing any tasks, some participants drank lemonade sweetened with sugar, which restores blood glucose, whereas others drank lemonade containing a sugar substitute. Only lemonade with sugar reduced the attraction effect. These results show one way in which the body (blood glucose) interacts with the mind (self-control and reliance on heuristics).

REFERENCE:

Masicampo, E. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2008). Toward a physiology of dual-process reasoning and judgment: Lemonade, willpower, and effortful rule-based analysis. Psychological Science, 19, 255-260.

Download it while it is hot.

(*) When Decision Science News says that “this” is interesting, it means the finding that sugar can affect the particular heuristic employed is interesting.

For a more classically cognitive model of how heuristics are selected from the adaptive toolbox, see:

  • Rieskamp, Jörg & Otto, Philipp E. (2006). SSL: A Theory of How People Learn to Select Strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(2), 207-236.

For a blend of the biological and the cognitive, see:

  • Mata, Rui; Schooler, Lael J.; Rieskamp, Jörg (2007). The aging decision maker: Cognitive aging and the adaptive selection of decision strategies. Psychology and Aging, 22(4), 796-810.

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/julieivens/491354101/sizes/m/

May 21, 2008

JDM 2008, November 15-17, Chicago

Filed in Conferences ,SJDM ,SJDM-Conferences ,Uncategorized
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY FOR JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING

The Society for Judgment and Decision Making (SJDM) invites abstracts for symposia, oral presentations, and posters on any interesting topic related to judgment and decision making. Completed manuscripts are not required.

LOCATION, DATES, AND PROGRAM
SJDM’s annual conference will be held at the Chicago Hilton in Chicago, IL during November 15-17, 2008. Early registration and welcome reception will take place the evening of Friday, November 14. Following the format established in the last few years, the schedule includes a full day on Saturday to make room for more presentations and for two keynote speakers.

SUBMISSIONS
The deadline for submissions is June 15, 2008. Submissions for symposia, oral presentations, and posters should be made through the SJDM website at http://sql.sjdm.org. Technical questions can be addressed to the webmaster, Alan Schwartz, at www at sjdm.org. All other questions can be addressed to the program chair, (also) Alan Schwartz, at alansz at uic.edu.

ELIGIBILITY
At least one author of each presentation must be a member of SJDM. Joining at the time of submission will satisfy this requirement. A membership form may be downloaded from the SJDM website at http://www.sjdm.org. An individual may give only one talk (podium presentation) and present only one poster, but may be a co-author on multiple talks and/or posters.

AWARDS
The Best Student Poster Award is given for the best poster presentation whose first author is a student member of SJDM.

The Hillel Einhorn New Investigator Award is intended to encourage outstanding work by new researchers. Applications are due July 1, 2008. Further details are available at http://www.sjdm.org.

The Jane Beattie Memorial Fund subsidizes travel to North America for a foreign scholar in pursuits related to judgment and decision research, including attendance at the annual SJDM
meeting. Information and an application form can be found at http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/joshua.klayman/more/BeattieInfo07.htm.

Applications are due by July 16, 2008.

PROGRAM COMMITTEE
Alan Schwartz (Chair), George Wu, Melissa Finucane, Craig McKenzie, Yuval Rottenstreich, Michel Regenwetter, Gal Zauberman, Michael Birnbaum (SJDM president), Julie Downs (Conference Coordinator)

(*) Decision Science News believes deeply in the city of Chicago

May 12, 2008

Duke Postdoc – July 1 Deadline

Filed in Jobs ,SJDM
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

WELL-PAID POSTDOC AT DUKE’S FUQUA SCHOOL

fqa

Many great JDMers such as Luce, Bettman, Soll, Larrick, Ariely, Payne, Clemen, Fitzsimons can be found at Duke. Now, so can a lucky postdoc.

Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business invites applications for a two year Postdoctoral Fellowship in the area of Behavioral Decision Making. The postdoctoral fellow will work with Dr. John Payne, Dr. Jim Bettman and Dr. Mary Frances Luce on work related to the impact of emotion on decision making. Planned projects include experimental laboratory research addressing the interaction of different forms and sources of emotion with features of decision task environments.

Opportunities will exist to apply this research within medical and financial domains, depending in part on the interests of the applicant. Applicants should have training in experimental construction, design, and analysis as well as a high-quality, ongoing research stream. The position will provide opportunities to interact with faculty across the business school and allied departments at Duke University. No teaching is required. Salary amount is $50,000; in addition, the post doc will have access to health, dental and retirement benefits. Candidates should submit a CV and selected papers, as well as statements of teaching and research interests, and they should arrange for three letters of recommendation to be sent. Review of applications will begin immediately and will continue until the position is filled.

Candidates are encouraged to have all materials submitted prior to July 1, 2008 to ensure full consideration. If interested, please email CV to mluce at duke.edu.

May 5, 2008

Contracts to fight procrastination

Filed in Research News
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

A TALE OF TWO SELVES

Psychologists and economists love to talk about the notion of two selves: present self and future self. It’s a nice way to explain the tendency to have one preference about the future, but a very different preference when the future becomes the present. On Sunday, future self might want to go to bed early on Thursday, wake up early on Friday, and hit the gym where it will listen to one hour of “Listen-and-repeat Italian” lessons while mastering the StairMaster.

However, come Thursday evening’s dinner with a client, this voice cannot be heard next to that of present self saying yes to dessert, coffee, after-dinner liquer, and a postprandial visit to the pub. Sunday’s voice is also asleep Friday morning, when the present self resets the alarm from 5:30 to 8:00.

In a clever April fools joke, the website www.thinkgeek.com proposed a solution in the form of an alarm clock that donates money to your most-hated cause should you hit the snooze button. Imagine giving money to a despised politician every time you slept in. Might that get you out of bed?

While the SnuzNLuz alarm clock was a joke, it was a brilliant one. I believe that someone will run with this or a very similar idea. Many future selves find their present selves to be their own worst enemies, and might be willing to pay obedience school tuition. In fact, the much-buzzed about www.stickk.com is built on this model: taxing yourself for failing to lose weight, quit smoking, etc.

I am reminded of the time I was a postdoc at Columbia University, on the job market, and deep in a publish-or-perish the phase of my career. I instituted a similar (though lower-tech) mechanism. My rule was that if I didn’t write a certain number of pages each day, I would lose five dollars. I think I lost about $60 on the scheme, though it did land me a job I love.

I remember being seriously conflicted about whom to give the money to if I procrastinated. I felt that if I gave it to a good cause, I would be continually justifying my procrastination as charitable. I felt that if I gave it to a bad cause, that would be evil. I also feared that I would start justifying my procrastination by telling myself the bad cause isn’t so bad. (Sound far-fetched? The idea that we might infer our preferences from our actions is a key, if not field-defining, idea from social psychology.)

In the end, I chose to leave the money on a seat on the New York subway. Maybe a good person would find it, maybe a bad person would find it, all I was certain of was regretting my procrastination. Given that you’re not evil, if you found $5 on the 1/9 train around 2005, I hope that it inched you closer to your goals.

April 28, 2008

Are statistics books impossible to understand?

Filed in Gossip ,Profiles
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

OPTIMAL SHOULDER STANDING

Decision Science News has long been influenced by Phil Greenspun’s observations, such as this one:

Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp.

which is known as Greenspun’s Tenth Rule. Trivia buffs will know that there weren’t 9 before it.  For those who aren’t programming nerds, this rule contains elements of: don’t reinvent the wheel, use the right tool for the job, and stand on the shoulders of giants, plus a hint of “my favourite programming language is better than yours”.

While doing some research on consumers’ (in)ability to detect differences between products, we came across a 1987 Greenspun & Klotz paper “Audio Analysis VI: Testing Audio Cables”. The authors are engineers who put participants to a single-blind test of sound quality transmitted through high and low quality audio cables.  (They found that people can tell two cables apart, but that the expensive cable was preferred only 15 times out of 28.) This seems to be straight-ahead experimental psych, so we were a little surprised when the authors, instead of reporting basic significance tests chose to rederive and compute them from scratch (in Common Lisp, of course) and document the story in a two-page appendix. Perhaps it was the Common Lisp that reminded us of it, but we couldn’t help drop Greenspun a line and ask:

From: Dan Goldstein
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2008

Dear Phil,
[…]
I wonder if you violated the spirit of your 10th law in your 1987 Computer Music Journal article by coding, and describing in a two-page appendix, what could have been replaced by reporting a simple significance test. Such tests are pre-coded in every stats package and in the back of every stats book. This is not a criticism, I’m just wondering why you went to all the trouble.

We were amazed and delighted to get a reply:

From: Philip Greenspun
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008

Several issues…

1) most of the readers are not stats experts

2) stats books are virtually impossible to understand (I tried a bunch
and gave up, even though I was an undergrad math major!)

3) I was able to explain what I was doing using simple probability
laws that most of the readers would have understood, sharing some
insights from Al Drake, a great probability teacher in the MIT EECS
department

So many people use stats tests and don’t understand them.

We see where Phil is coming from, but wonder if he isn’t being a bit hard on statistics.

April 21, 2008

More tales of a productive man

Filed in Profiles ,Research News
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

INTERVIEW WITH BRUNO FREY, PART II

Here we continue last week’s Bruno Frey interview that Lionel Page and Dan Goldstein conducted before Frey’s Economics of Behaviour and Decision Making presentation at London Business School.

Lionel Page – I was thinking of what you said before about the negative effect of the Nobel prize. What do you think is the effect of tenure? I was wondering if there is maybe a negative of tenure. Is there evidence of this kind of thing?

Bruno Frey – I rather like this long period in which one learns the trade of one’s profession. One is socialized to the profession and then one gets tenure. In principle, I would argue that this should be the end of evaluations. Unfortunately, this is no longer true. I am fighting against evaluations. I think when people are well trained, afterwards one should leave them and tell them “ok, go ahead and work”. You would have a larger variance (you would have some that wouldn’t work any more, I perfectly admit that) but the others are then free to do what they like and can do long-run and different things. If you look at my research topics, where would I get approval? What group of economists would approve when I say I want to work on World Heritage? They say, he is crazy. When I say I want to work on awards or on orders, they would say “oh that’s crazy”. On happiness, “crazy, happiness doesn’t exist” etc., etc. I say one must give things a little bit of time to develop.

Dan Goldstein – Is it fair to say your productivity has much to do with the fact that you’re investigating pretty much just whatever it is you want to investigate?

BF – I am still one of those professors who is totally free to do what he wants. I do not have to get funds to do research. I am paid as a professor. I have some co-workers with whom I do the research, but I can decide on my own. Of course with my young collaborators, if they were are not interested, it wouldn’t work at all, but I don’t have to attract funds from outside and try to explain myself. How can I explain, in a new field, what will come out?

DG – Of course, where incentives are concerned, you have the freedom to do nothing if you want …

BF – Yes, but I believe in intrinsic motivation, that essentially good scientists, good scholars are intrinsically motivated. They will work because they like to work.

I couldn’t get interested in a lot of subjects that economists do, especially when I know it’s more or less dry and irrelevant. You know, I just wouldn’t like to work on general equilibrium analysis. And I am probably very bad at it. So, I always try to find new topics. Afterwards, the Americans come with their brilliant educations and the English with their brilliant educations, and of course are better. Or let’s say they are certainly better trained to do the things. So, I have to try to be a little bit original.

April 18, 2008

Tales of a productive man

Filed in Profiles ,Research News
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

BRUNO FREY INTERVIEW, PART I

A few weeks ago, Lionel Page and your Decision Science News editor had Bruno Frey come to speak at the Economics of Behaviour and Decision Making series in London. Realizing that it is not every day someone of such stature comes to town, we decided to profiter (as French people such as Lionel say) and interview the man.

Dan Goldstein – You have been incredibly productive in your career, someone with 600 publications of various kinds and 18 books. You got your habilitation in 1969. So I’m just wondering, what are some of your secrets for being able to produce so much? When do you write? What do you not do that other people are doing? We all have the same number of hours in a year.

Bruno Frey – I think first of all I like to write, I like to do research. I like to find new topics. I walk through life always seeing things which might interest me. It might take a long time until something concrete comes out. Then I make my first sketch of what would be a problem. It takes months and months and when I fly or take the train, I keep thinking about it.

I do various things at the same time. So for instance now, the very newest thing I am working on is World Heritage. Who comes on the list? What site comes on the list? Is it perhaps unproductive to do that? All the funds go into the monuments on the list and it is possible the rest of culture loses. That’s one of the questions.

I also worked on the assassination of politicians. That’s an interesting topic too and almost no economists have worked on that. I mean physical assassination. One kind of assassination is physical–in some languages we call it Attentat, but the word doesn’t exist in English, but I want to introduce it. In English you always have to say an attempted or successful assassination and I want to cover both. I want to find the determinants of who is attacked, and the corresponding effort to protect.

I also do research on awards: orders and decorations and things like that. In England it’s of course very, very important, but in America, too. Americans have a huge amount of awards, you know The Best Teacher of the University or the month. Its incredible how it’s exploded.

DG – What do you think about the effect of the Nobel Prize on the field of Economics?

BF – On the individuals it’s rather negative. Afterwards, they’re no longer so productive …

Lionel Page – Is there evidence of that?

BF – Yes, yes, yes, there is some evidence of course, people differ but on average and there is a very nice paper on managers who were appointed Managers of the Year. Afterwards they performed much worse, because they want to write a book and do all kinds of things not related to their firm. So I look at awards, they are one of the incentives besides monitoring incentives. Then of course I try to do research on happiness.

DG – My question about the Nobel was about the field of Economics. So Economics is undeniably a very successful field. You go to almost every University, they’ll have an economics department, or whereas a less successful fields often lack departments. Economics faculty tend to be well paid. Universities seem to put a lot of resources in to get the best economists because it’s a signal of the overall quality of the university. A neighbouring field like Sociology may not get the same kind of respect. Do you think that has anything to do with the Nobel, or do you think it’s just about the importance of Economics as a subject?

BF – No, it has to do with the Nobel, and that is very funny story, why the Nobel is being awarded to economists and why not to sociologists. I think it was more or less one or two persons, and after all it’s financed by the Central Bank. Of course economists have a closer connection to the Central Bank people in Sweden than the Sociologists do.

I think it has raised the prestige of economics tremendously. I do not think that it has to do with the importance of economics as a discipline, because I am afraid we have problems there, but my discipline does not want to see the problem. It is the case that professional economists at universities and business schools are no longer very much in the centre of political debate. A Keynes or a Lord Robbins, etc., they were in the centre. Of course there are still some exceptions, but in general now economists working in banks (or finance people working in banks) are asked “what is the interest rate likely to be in the next month”, “how is inflation going,” etc.?

To be continued

April 7, 2008

If you can get through this, you can be a marketing professor

Filed in Gossip ,Jobs
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

EVERYTHING YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT THE AMA INTERVIEWS (2008 edition)

PhD students in Marketing, Psychology, and Economics are now gearing up to get their “packets” ready to mail out by the fourth of July in the hopes of lining up interviews at the annual AMA Summer Educator’s Conference. Each year DSN reprints this sort of “what to expect while you’re applying” guide, first published here by Dan Goldstein in 2005.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?
I’ve seen the Marketing job market turn happy grad students into quivering masses of fear. I want to share experiences that I and others have contributed, and provide a bit advice to make the whole process less mysterious.

WHAT DO I KNOW?
I’ve been on the AMA job market twice and the Psychology market once. As a professor I’ve conducted 20 AMA interviews and contributed to hiring decisions. I’ve been on the candidate of about 40 AMA interviews, as well as numerous campus visits, face-to-face interviews, offers, and rejections. I’m an outsider to Marketing who went on the market older and with more experience than the average rookie (35 years of age, with 8 years of research scientist, postdoc, visiting scholar, and industry positions). I’ve hired many people for many academic posts, so I know both sides.

HOW TO GET INTO THE AMA JOB MARKET
First, at least a couple months before the conference, find where it will be. It’s called the Summer Educator’s Conference. Strange name, I know. Get yourself a room in the conference hotel, preferably on the floor where the express elevator meets the local elevator for the upper floors. You’ll be hanging out on this floor waiting to change elevators anyway, so you might as well start there.

Next, get your advisor / sponsor to write a cover letter encouraging people to meet with you at AMA. It helps if this person is in Marketing. Get 1 or 2 other letters of recommendation, a CV, and some choice pubs. Put them in an envelope and mail them out to a friend of your sponsor at the desired school. It should look like the letter is coming from your sponsor, even though you are doing the actual assembly and mailing. Repeat this process a bunch of times. It’s a good idea to hit a school with 2 packets, 3 if you suspect they’re a little disorganized. Certainly send one to the recruiting coordinator (they may send letters to your department’s secretary telling you they are hiring) and one to your sponsor’s friend. Mail to schools regardless of whether they are advertising a position or not. This is academia: nobody knows anything. This means you may be sending 50 or more packets. You want to have them mailed by the 4th of July at the absolute latest.

THEN WHAT?
Wait to get calls or emails from schools wishing to set up AMA interviews with you. These calls may come in as late as one week before the conference. Some schools will not invite you for totally unknown reasons. You may get interviews from the top 10 schools and rejected from the 30th-ranked one. Don’t sweat it. Again, this is the land of total and absolute unpredictability that you’re entering into. Also, know that just because you get an interview doesn’t mean they have a job. Sometimes schools don’t know until the last minute if they’ll have funding for a post. Still, you’ll want to meet with them anyway. After the AMA, you’ll hopefully get “fly-outs,” that is, offers to come and visit the campus and give a talk. This means you’ve made the top five or so. Most offers go down in December. There’s a second market that happens after all the schools realize they’ve made offers to the same person. Of course, some schools get wise to this and don’t make offers to amazing people who would have come. We need some kind of market mechanism to work out this part of the system.

THE “IT’S ALL ABOUT FRIENDSHIP” RULE
Keep in mind that you will leave this process with 1 or 0 jobs. Therefore, when talking to a person, the most likely thing is that he or she will not be your colleague in the future. Therefore, think of each opportunity as a chance to make a friend. You’ll need friends to collaborate, to get tenure, get grants, and to go on the market again if you’re not happy with what you get.

HOW DO YOU FIND OUT IN WHICH ROOM TO INTERVIEW?
The schools will leave messages for you telling you in which rooms your interviews will be. You’ll get calls, emails, and notes held for you at the hotel reception. Some schools will fail to get in touch with you so you have to try to find them. Many profs ask the hotel to make their room number public, but for some reason many hotel operators will still not give you the room number. Naturally having a laptop and internet connection allows for emailing of room numbers. Try to take care of this early on the first day.

HOW TO TREAT YOURSELF WHILE THERE
My sponsor gave me the advice of not going out at night and getting room service for breakfast and dinner. This worked for me. Also, the ridiculously high price of a room-service breakfast made me feel like I was sparing no expense, which I found strangely motivating.

HOW DO THE ACTUAL AMA INTERVIEWS GO?
At the pre-arranged time you will knock on their hotel room door. You will be let into a suite (p=.4) or a normal hotel room (p=.5, but see below). In the latter case, there will be professors with long and illustrious titles—people you once imagined as dignified—sitting on beds in their socks. The other people in the room may not look at you when you walk in because they will be looking for a precious few seconds at your CV. For at least some people in the room, this may be the first time they have concentrated on your CV. Yikes is right. Put the important stuff early in your CV so nobody can miss it.

THE SEAT OF HONOR
There will be one armchair in the room. Someone will motion towards the armchair, smile, and say, “You get the seat of honor!” This will happen at every school, at every interview, for three days. I promise.

THE TIME COURSE
There will be two minutes of pleasant chit-chat. They will propose that you talk first and they talk next. There will be a little table next to the chair on which you will put your flip book of slides. You will present for 30 minutes, taking their questions as they come. They will be very nice. When done, they will ask you if you have anything to ask them. You of course do not. You hate this question. You make something up. Don’t worry, they too have a spiel, and all you need to do is find a way to get them started on it. By the time they are done, it’s time for you to leave. The whole experience will feel like it went rather well.

PREDICTING IF YOU WILL GET A FLY-OUT
It’s impossible to tell from how it seems to have gone whether they will give you a fly-out or not. Again, this is the land of staggering and high-impact uncertainty. They might not invite you because you were too bad (and they don’t want you), or because you were too good (and they think they don’t stand a chance of getting you).

DO INTERVIEWS DEVIATE FROM THAT MODEL?
Yes.

Sometimes instead of a hotel room, they will have a private meeting room (p=.075). Sometimes they will have a private meeting room with fruit, coffee, and bottled water (p=.025). Sometimes, they will fall asleep while you are speaking (p=.05). Sometimes they will be rude to you (p=.025). Sometimes a key person will miss an early interview due to a hangover (p=.025). Sometimes, if it’s the end of the day, they will drink alcohol with you (p=.18, given that it’s the end of the day).

HOW YOU THINK THE PROCESS WORKS
The committee has read your CV and cover letter and looked at your pubs. They know your topic and can instantly appreciate that what you are doing is important. They know the value of each journal you have published in and each prize you’ve won. They know your advisor and the strengths she or he instills into each student. They ignore what they’re supposed to ignore and assume everything they’re supposed to assume. They’ll attach a small weight to the interview and fly you out based on your record.

HOW THE PROCESS REALLY WORKS
The interviewers will have looked at your CV for about one minute a couple months ago, and for a few seconds as you walked in the room. They will never have read your entire cover letter, and they will have forgotten most of what they did read. They could care less about your advisor and will get offended that you didn’t cite their advisor. They’ll pay attention to everything they’re supposed to ignore and assume nothing except what you repeat five times. Flouting 50 years of research in judgment and decision-making, they’ll attach a small weight to your CV and fly you out based on your interview.

Your ability to speak English well won’t get you a good job, but your inability to do so will eliminate you from consideration at every top school. Understand that business schools put a premium on teaching. If the interviewers don’t think you can communicate in the classroom, they’re probably not going to take a chance on you. If you are just starting out and your spoken English is shaky, my advice is to work on it as hard as you are working on anything else.

TWO WAYS TO GIVE YOUR SPIEL
1) The plow. You start and the first slide and go through them until the last slide. Stop when interrupted and get back on track.

2) The volley. Keep the slides closed and just talk with the people about your topic. Get them to converse with you, to ask you questions, to ask for clarifications. When you need to show them something, open up the presentation and show them just that slide.

I did the plow the first year and the volley the second year. I got four times more fly-outs the second year. Econometricians are now trying to determine if there was causality.

HOW TO ACT
Make no mistake, you are an actor auditioning for a part. There will be no energy in the room when you arrive. You have to bring the energy into the room with you. The interviewers are tired. They’ve been listening to people in a stuffy hotel room from dawn till dusk for days. If you do an average job, you lose: You have to be two standard deviations above the mean to get a fly-out. So audition for the part, and make yourself stand out. If you want to learn how actors audition, read Audition by Michael Shurtleff.

SOCIAL SKILLS MATTER
From the candidate’s point of view, everything is about the CV and the correctness of the mathematical proofs in the job market paper. However, for better or for worse, extra-academic qualities matter. Here are two examples. 1) The Social Lubricant factor. Departments get visitors all the time: guest speakers, visiting professors, job candidates, etc. Some departments are a bunch of folks who stare at their shoes when introduced to a new person. These departments have a real problem: they have nobody on board who can make visitors feel at ease, and sooner or later word starts to spread about how socially awkward the people at University X are. To fix such problems, departments sometimes hire socially-skilled types who know how to make people comfortable in conversation, and who know how to ask good questions during talks. Also, interviewers assume (probably incorrectly) that people who can talk a good game will be star teachers. 2) The Soft Sell factor. Many people succeed in academia not because they are often right, but also because they are masters of making other people feel like they aren’t wrong. Defensiveness or determination to embarrass when responding to critique is a sure way to blow an interview.

HAVE A QUIRK
One of the biggest risks facing you is that you will be forgotten. Make sure the interviewers know something unusual about you. My quirk is that I worked internationally as a theater director for over 10 years. It’s got nothing to do my research, but I can’t tell you the number of people who bring up this odd little fact when I do campus visits.

DON’T GIVE UP
Never think it’s hopeless. Just because you’re not two SDs above the mean at the school of your dreams, doesn’t mean you’re not the dream candidate of another perfectly good school.

Many candidates don’t realize the following: The students are competing for schools and the schools are competing for students. If you strike out, you can just try again next year. I know a person in Psychology who got 70 rejections in one year. I know a person in Marketing who was told he didn’t place in the top 60 candidates at the 20th ranked school. The subsequent year, both people got hired by top 5 departments. One of them is ridiculously famous!

RUMORS
Don’t gossip. All gossip can mess with your chances. Gossip that you are doing well can hurt you because schools will be afraid to invite you if they think you won’t come. Gossip that you are doing poorly can hurt you because schools that like you will be afraid to invite you if they think no one else does. Sometimes people will ask a prof at your school if you would come to their school, and the prof will then ask you. To heck with that. Just say that if they want to talk to you, they should deal with you directly.

The danger of rumors can be summed up by the following story. At ACR in 2003, I was having a beer with someone who confessed, “you know, my friend X at school Y told me that they want to hire you, but they’re afraid your wife won’t move to Z”. I was single.

ADDENDUM
Have your own advice to add? Want more detail on specific parts of the process? Let me know. dan at dangoldstein dot com.

March 31, 2008

Make marketing and political decisions for a living

Filed in Jobs
Subscribe to Decision Science News by Email (one email per week, easy unsubscribe)

MARKETING / POLITICS JOBS FOR APPLIED DECISION TYPES

Position: Senior Market Segmentation Specialist
Company: CA, Inc.
Location: Framingham, MA, Midtown Manhattan or Islandia, Long Island
Salary: $90-$110K + full-time benefits
Contact: Please email resume to dominique.goldstein at ca.com
CA, (NYSE: CA), one of the world’s leading independent, enterprise management software companies, unifies and simplifies complex information technology (IT) management across the enterprise for greater business results.

Job Overview
The Senior Market Segmentation Specialist develops and leads segmentation, market research, and market analysis projects. He/she engages heavily with other groups within CA to assist in business planning, market understanding, customer targeting and campaign planning. These groups include the business units, field marketing, executive management and other corporate marketing groups. This position involves providing actionable insights based on largely quantitative analysis.

Key Responsibilities

  • Lead projects that provide actionable insights into CA’s business and market opportunities.
  • Develop deep understanding of CA’s customer and market segments.
  • Develop and maintain complex Excel models designed to quantify CA market opportunity and performance.
  • Leverage and contribute to database tools within Segmentation group.
  • Support other marketing groups and the product business units with quantitative segment information and actionable insights for use in their planning and decision making.
  • Assist sales in understanding regional and worldwide opportunities through quantitative and qualitative analysis.
  • Develop new approaches and methodologies to increase CA’s understanding of its customer base and market.
  • Work collaboratively with other groups (e.g. Analyst Relations, Financial Planning, Strategic Planning) and executive management.
  • Mentor new team members, and provide direction and assistance to junior members of the team.
  • 10% travel
  • Preferred Education

  • Bachelor’s degree focusing on engineering, computer science, business, economics, or mathematics
  • In addition, a Master’s, MBA or PhD (not necessarily quant)
  • High academic achiever.
  • Work Experience

  • 7+ years business experience.
  • Experience in market research, quantitative analysis, market analysis, business intelligence, strategic planning, or financial analysis preferred.
  • Experience working in technology markets, software/IT preferred.
  • Specific Skills and Certifications

  • Quantitative analysis skills.
  • Very strong Excel.
  • Very strong Powerpoint and presentation capabilities.
  • Knowledge of Microsoft Access or other widely used databases.
  • Experience working in software or related industries.
  • Market research and segmentation analysis techniques.
  • Customer-focused with well-rounded, business experience.
  • Excellent written and oral communication skills.
  • Ability to collaborate and promote cross-functionality to engage other departments, in particular Development and Sales to get buy in on operational plans and strategies.
  • Ability to achieve senior management consensus and buy in to key customer/segment-focused efforts.
  • Position-Specific Authorities

  • Meet deadlines while delivering high quality work.
  • Identify required tools and methodologies required. Recruit assistance when required.
  • Maintain complex Excel and Access models for broad Marketing use.
  • Prioritize projects and draw on other resources as required.
  • Share sensitive data with other groups as needed for them to fulfill their responsibilities.
  • Jobs at the Analyst Institute

    The Analyst Institute assists organizations in building testing into their voter contact efforts, and is a clearinghouse for evidence-based best practices in progressive voter contact.

    We have four functions. First, we serve as a clearinghouse for evidence-based best practices in voter contact. Second, we directly assist organizations involved in on-going research, especially when that research addresses topics of wide interest. Third, we ensure that the highest research priorities are pursued in the present election cycle. And fourth, we facilitate data analysts and related professionals in sharing and collaborating.

    Contact: Cover letter and resume to Jobs@analystinstitute.org

    SENIOR ANALYST

    Responsibilities
    The Senior Analyst(s) will work closely with partner organizations in designing, executing, and analyzing their voter contact evaluations. These evaluations will usually involve randomized field experiments designed in the spring and implemented in the summer and fall. Any given study will likely involve membership recruitment, voter registration, voter persuasion, and/or get-out-the-vote efforts.

    This person must have experience with field research, be self-motivated, and thrive in a dynamic start-up environment. This person may work as a part-time consultant or as a full-time employee of the Analyst Institute.

    Qualifications

    • Experience with field research, especially field experiments.
    • Detail oriented and highly organized.
    • Experience working on, or with political campaigns.
    • Ability to work well under tight deadlines.
    • Excellent verbal and written skills.
    • Understanding of statistics and the methodology of political experiments and measurement.
    • PhD or MA in social science.

    Start Date: Flexible, ASAP
    Location: Washington DC, McPherson Square
    Deadline: 4/11
    Analyst Institute is an equal opportunity employer. Salary is commensurate with experience.

    ANALYST

    Responsibilities
    Analyst(s) will work closely with others in the Analyst Institute. Analyst(s) will be involved in a wide range of activities including managing voter files, editing documents and presentations, cleaning and evaluating experimental data, and working with partner organizations in executing and analyzing their voter contact evaluations. The Analyst Institute’s research will usually be randomized field experiments involving membership recruitment, voter registration, voter persuasion, and/or get-out-the-vote efforts.

    This person must have a background in a quantitative field (computer science, mathematics, statistics, econometrics, etc.), be self-motivated, and thrive in a dynamic start-up environment. Experience with field research and/or political campaigns is a plus.

    Qualifications

    • Comfortable with statistics software (SPSS, Stata, Excel, R, etc.)
    • Detail oriented and highly organized.
    • Ability to work well under tight deadlines.
    • Excellent analytical skills.
    • Able to learn quickly, and able to develop skills as needed.
    • Basic understanding of methodology of political experiments and measurement.

    Start Date: Flexible, ASAP
    Location: Washington DC, McPherson Square
    Salary: Commensurate with experience
    Deadline: 4/11

    br.jpg

    ** DSN FLASH**
    Bounded Rationality Summer School deadline extended till April 7th
    ***