This article develops a model of organizational knowledge acquisition in terms of modern psychological, sociological, economic and management theories by deconstructing the terms involved: an organization as a collective agent having goals and capabilities to achieve them; knowledge as the hidden state variables imputed to an agent as the basis of its capabilities; and acquisition as the reproduction of dispositions. This form of model enables one to relate the knowledge processes involved to existing models of organizational processes, and to understand such phenomena as knowledge economics and knowledge management. The breadth of the notion of organization encompasses markets, firms and societies; the operational definition of knowledge clarifies its role and the utility of the notion; and the focus on reproduction of dispositions in knowledge acquisition enables the management of knowledge acquisition to be analyzed. ______________________________________________________________________________________ 1.

The paper presents a general architecture for behaviour based control systems for autonomous agents. A number of archi tectural principles are proposed which make it possible to combine reactive control with learning and problem solving in a coherent way. In particular, I investigate the interaction between reinforcement learning, internal world models and dynamic action selection as well as a number of connections to psychological models and biological systems.

In this paper we propose three methods of measuring betweenness of individuals in networks which are best modeled as graphs with explicit time ordering on their edges. The betweenness centrality index is one of the basic measure in the analysis of social networks, but most of the work done for measuring the betweenness index of individuals is based on the aggregate representation of the network. Many network problems are based on fundamental relationship involving time. We incorporate the time factor in the aggregate graph representation of social networks to create dynamic networks. We define and measure the betweenness in this dynamic framework. We compare the three betweenness with the standard betweenness measure for the same network. We show that by incorporating the exact times of interactions among individuals in a network, we can better study the betweenness of individuals in the In this paper, we extend the study of betweenness centrality of individuals in social networks to networks which are explicitly dynamic. The idea of representing societies as networks of interacting individuals dates back to

This article defines groups and their function in society and points out the need for training in group processes. It distinguishes between task, therapy, growth, and training groups, defines a group process facilitator as a catalyst to the processes through which a group performs its task, separates the process-facilitation role from other facilitative roles dealing wi the content of a discussion, and looks at the history of group process laboratories and the training of facilitators. Also discussed are the role and requirements of the leader-trainer-facilitator, the function of power in the facilitator role, the nature of intervention, the preparation of facilitators-intervenors, and the paradox of facilitation and facilitator intervention strategy. It points to the variations in the concepts of the role of the facilitator and to the weaknesses in the preparation of facilitators at the present time [1989], and calls for further research in the facilitator role. EDITOR’S NOTE Published in 1989 in Management Communication Quarterly, this article grapples with the boundaries of the process-facilitation role. It discusses the function of power in the facilitator role and its relationship with other facilitative roles such as trainer, coach, therapist, content specialist, and leader. The article also presents some of the early group research experiments conducted by Lewin, Rogers and others that underpin what we know today about group facilitation and group dynamics. The author John “Sam” Keltner was involved in early inquiries into group dynamics at the National Training Laboratory in Group Development and wrote

Abstract not found

v Declaration .................................... ix Acknowledgements................................ xi 1Prelude 1 TheVeryIdeaofRepresentation......................... 2 TypesofSimilarity ................................ 8 IsSimilarityIndeterminate? ........................... 11 TheRoleofSimilarityinCognition....................... 11 Summary&GeneralDiscussion......................... 14 2 Theories of Similarity 17 SimilarityDataSets................................ 17 SpatialRepresentation .............................. 21 FeaturalRepresentation.............................. 31 TreeRepresentation................................ 40 NetworkRepresentation ............................. 47 Alignment-BasedSimilarityModels....................... 48 TransformationalSimilarityModels ....................... 50 Summary&GeneralDiscussion......................... 54 i 3 On Representational Complexity 55 ApproachestoModelSelection ......................... 57 ChoosinganAdditiveClusteringRepresentation ................ 67 ChoosinganAdditiveTreeRepresentation ................... 82 ChoosingaSpatialRepresentation........................ 94 Summary&GeneralDiscussion......................... 95 4 Featural Representation 97 AMenagerieofFeaturalModels......................... 98 ClusteringModels.................................104 GeometricComplexityCriteria..........................106 AlgorithmsforFittingFeaturalModels .....................107 MonteCarloStudyI:DotheAlgorithmsWork? ................109 RepresentationsofKinshipTerms ........................117 MonteCarloStudyII:Complexity........................122 ExperimentI:Faces................................125 ExperimentII:Countries .............................1...

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

It is now nearly seventy years since George Kelly commenced writing what became his major work defining the theory and practice of personal construct psychology (PCP). In those years much has changed in psychology and in the scientific ethos. The book was completed in the initial stages of what became termed the cognitive revolution. If we are to fully appreciate PCP it is important to attempt to place it in the context of Kelly’s life and times, and the developments in psychology that preceded and followed it. This article presents relevant aspects of his era, commenting on their significance for understanding PCP and the role that it played, or did not play, in various developments in psychology. In particular, the role that PCP and the repertory grid played in artificial intelligence research on knowledge acquisition for expert systems is discussed in terms of its significance for other aspects of PCP research. 1

This research focused on the role that higher order structural properties of stereotypic knowledge play in the processing of social information. It is argued that stereotypic assumptions about cause-effect relations provide important constraints for the causal structure underlying the perceiver's subjective representation of social information. Experiment 1 shows how, within the context of a jury decision experiment, the causal structure underlying stereotypic knowledge about African Americans influences the construal of causality in a situation involving a member of that group. Results from 2 additional experiments indicate that this construal effect is based in part on stereotypic knowledge affecting the encoding of the trial evidence instead of on biasing responses at the output stage. The implications of these findings are discussed, and a theoretical framework is offered according to which the application of category knowledge involves not only the matching of stereotypic attributes but also the alignment of structural relations in the environment. The notion that subjective experience goes beyond the bare sensation of stimuli, that we actively construe reality instead of passively registering our environment, has long guided psycho-

Abstract: In this paper, we shall present a model of opinion dynamics called Multiple Equilibria Regulation (MER) Model which, concerning social equilibrium, is based on the Bounded Confidence (BC) Model’s procedures and, it takes under consideration an agents ’ internal (“intraindividual”) regulation structure among different opinions regarding the same social issue. First, we give a detailed description of the model and define its parameters. Then, we explore this nonlinear model by a series of computer simulations for a variety of parameter ’ values. Next, we examine under what conditions the model exhibits sensitive dependence on initial conditions and, finally, we calculate the Lyapunov Exponents and the Information Entropy. Our results show that for certain parameter ’ values, the system exhibits sensitivity of final state to initial state, thus it is chaotic (deterministic and unpredictable). Hence, by combining two psychosocial principles that both tend to certainty (stability) we obtain an uncertainty (unpredictability) concerning the outcome of the system.