Phases of psychologically optimal learning experience: task-based time allocation model

Abstract

Individual’s preferences, learning ability, passion, and perseverance influence which available learning challenges he will choose, for how long he will persist, what emotions will be experienced while working on those challenges and what utility will be gained from these activities. In our approach to this interdisciplinary problem, we build a bridge between time-allocation models developed within utility theory and empirical emotional experience and learning models from psychology by developing a novel task-based time allocation model. As parameters of the model are highly dynamic, we use Monte Carlo simulations to investigate the phase space of observed emotional states with respect to aforementioned individual’s traits.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, for instance, (Meiran 2000; Monsell 2003) for the theory of cognitive control in task switching and multitasking.

  2. 2.

    This setup here is meant to associate the reader with possibilities to apply empirical methods to the task based time allocation model and underline the possibility for empirical estimation of the influence of variables, such as skills and challenge in our case, on utility from a concrete allocation of time among activities. Note that the empirical estimation of these effects is not the aim of this paper, which is simulation-based.

References

  1. Anzai Y, Simon HA (1979) The theory of learning by doing. Psychol Rev 86(2):124–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arrow KJ (1971) The economic implications of learning by doing. In: Hahn FH (ed) Readings in the theory of growth. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 131–149

    Google Scholar 

  3. Banerjee AV (1992) A simple model of herd behavior. Q J Econ 107(3):797–817

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Becker GS (1965) A theory of the allocation of time. Econ J 81(324):493–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ben-Akiva M, Bierlaire M (1999) Discrete choice methods and their applications to short term travel decisions. In: Hall RW (ed) Handbook of transportation science. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 5–33

    Google Scholar 

  6. Csikszentmihalyi M (2004) Good business: leadership, flow, and the making of meaning. Penguin, New York

    Google Scholar 

  7. Csikszentmihalyi M (2008) Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. Harper perennial modern classics. Harper Collins, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Csikszentmihalyi M (2013) Creativity: the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper perennial modern classics. Harper Collins, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. DeSerpa AC (1971) A theory of the economics of time. Econ J 81(324):828–846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. DeTombe DJ (2002) Complex societal problems in operational research. Eur J Oper Res 140(2):232–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dolan RJ (2002) Emotion, cognition, and behavior. Science 298:1191–1194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Duckworth A (2016) Grit: the power of passion and perseverance. Scribner, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. EURO: the Association of European Operational Research Societies, what is operational research? https://www.euro-online.org/web/pages/301/or-and-euro. Accessed 16 July 2018

  14. Jara-Díaz S, Rosales-Salas J (2017) Beyond transport time: a review of time use modeling. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 97:209–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kitamura R (1984) A model of daily time allocation to discretionary out-of-home activities and trips. Transp Res Part B Methodol 18(3):255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Leitner J, Leopold-Wildburger U (2011) Experiments on forecasting behavior with several sources of information: a review of the literature. Eur J Oper Res 213(3):459–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Meiran N (2000) Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychol Res 63(3):234–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Monsell S (2003) Task switching. Trends Cogn Sci 7(3):134–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Muth J F (1961) Rational expectations and the theory of price movements. Econom J Econom Soc 29(3):315–335

    Google Scholar 

  20. Simon HA (1959) Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. Am Econ Rev 49(3):253–283

    Google Scholar 

  21. Simon HA (1972) Theories of bounded rationality. Decis Organ 1(1):161–176

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1990) Theory of games and economic behavior, 3rd edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  24. Walker J, Ben-Akiva M (2002) Generalized random utility model. Math Soc Sci 43(3):303–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Yamamoto T, Kitamura R (1999) An analysis of time allocation to in-home and out-of-home discretionary activities across working days and non-working days. Transportation 26(2):231–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors wish to express their thankfulness to Ines Štampar for preparing contour plots and for the assistance with a video abstract, to Aljaž Protić for the assistance with a video abstract (available as a supplementary material to the paper). We are indebted to anonymous referees and participants of the 14th International Symposium on Operational Research in Slovenia for their useful comments and suggestions. Finally, we express our thankfulness to anonymous referees of the Central European Journal of Operations Research for stressing excellent arguments which sharpened the focal points of our paper about rational usage of time and emerging emotions of the practicing agent.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Drago Bokal.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The research conducted in this paper was partially funded from the research agency of Slovenia, Grants L7-5459, N1-0057, and J1-8130, and research program P1-0297.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (mp4 59086 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bokal, D., Steinbacher, M. Phases of psychologically optimal learning experience: task-based time allocation model. Cent Eur J Oper Res 27, 863–885 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-019-00609-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Flow
  • Grit
  • Utility
  • Task-choice
  • Learning
  • Phase-diagram
  • Monte Carlo simulations

Mathematics Subject Classification

  • 90B70
  • 97C70
  • 91G60
  • 91B16