Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36237686›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2022

The contribution of activity theory to modeling multi-actor decision-making: A focus on human capital investments.

Silvia Marocco, Alessandra Talamo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Exploring the Restorative Effects of Natural Environments in Virtual Reality.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Silvia MaroccoDepartment of Social and Developmental Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Alessandra TalamoDepartment of Social and Developmental Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Making investment decisions is usually considered a challenging task for investors because it is a process based on risky, complex, and consequential choices (Shanmuganathan, 2020). When it comes to Investments in human capital (IHC), such as startups fundings, the aspect of decision-making (DM) becomes even more critical since the outcome of the DM process is not completely predictable. Indeed, it has to take into consideration the will, goals, and motivations of each human actor involved: those who invest as well as those who seek investments. We define this specific DM process as multi-actor DM (MADM) since not a group is making decisions but different actors, or groups of different actors, who - starting from non-coinciding objectives - need to reach a mutual agreement and converge toward a common goal for the success of the investment. This review aims to give insights on psychological contributions to the study of complex DM processes that deal with IHC to provide scholars and practitioners with a theoretical framework and a tool for describing the complex socio-ecological systems involved in the DM processes. For this purpose, we discuss in the paper how the third generation of activity theory (Leont'ev, 1974, 1978;Engeström, 1987, 2001) could be used as an appropriate model to explain the specificities of MADM construct, focusing on the particular case of startup funding. Design thinking techniques will be proposed as a methodology to create a bridge between different activity systems.

Indexed as

activity theorydecision-makinghuman capital investmentsmulti-actorsocio-cultural psychologystartup funding

Identifiers

PMID36237686
PMCPMC9551451

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.