Ordering decision behavior under recency effect

被引：0
|
作者：
Li Y. [1 ]
Mu B. [2 ]
机构：
[1] School of Management, China University of Mining & Technology(Beijing), Beijing
[2] School of Economics and Management, China University of Geoscience(Beijing), Beijing
来源：
Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, CIMS | 2021年 / 27卷 / 05期
基金：
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词：
Behavioral cause; Bullwhip effect; Ordering lead time; Recency effect; Supply line underweighting;
D O I：
10.13196/j.cims.2021.05.024
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Supply line underweighting is a robust ordering decision error. To find a behavioral antecedent to supply line underweighting, a multi-period one seller's ordering model was established and the behavioral ordering decision model was depicted by a demand-chasing fashion. The difference between the behavioral model and the basic model were compared through simulation. The recency effect was a significant behavioral antecedent to supply line underweighting. As the recency effect was strengthened, the supply line underweighting intensifies and the operating cost increased. Under the influence of the recency effect, the increased ordering lead time and demand volatility intensified supply line underweighting, but the increased batch size weakened supply line underweighting. © 2021, Editorial Department of CIMS. All right reserved.
引用
收藏
页码：1483 / 1493
页数：10
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] STERMAN J D., Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment, Management Science, 35, 3, pp. 321-339, (1989)
  • [2] MACDONALD J R, FROMMER I D, KARAESMEN I Z., Decision making in the beer game and supply chain performance, Operations Management Research, 6, 3-4, pp. 119-126, (2013)
  • [3] CROSON R, DONOHUE K, KATOK E, Et al., Order stability in supply chains: Coordination risk and the role of coordination stock, Production and Operations Management, 23, 2, pp. 176-196, (2014)
  • [4] DIEHL E, STERMAN J D., Effects of feedback complexity on dynamic decision making, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 2, pp. 198-215, (1995)
  • [5] GONZALEZ C, FAKHARI P, BUSEMEYER J., Dynamic decision making: Learning processes and new research directions, Human Factors: The Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59, 5, pp. 713-721, (2017)
  • [6] CROSON R, DONOHUE K., Upstream versus downstream information and its impact on the bullwhip effect, System Dynamics Review, 21, 3, pp. 249-260, (2005)
  • [7] SARKAR S, KUMAR S., A behavioral experiment on inventory management with supply chain disruption, International Journal of Production Economics, 169, pp. 169-178, (2015)
  • [8] OLIVA R, GONCALVES P., Evaluating overreaction to backlog as a behavioral cause of the bullwhip effect
  • [9] KAO Yingfang, VELUPILLAI K V., Behavioural economics: Classical and modern, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 22, 2, pp. 236-271, (2015)
  • [10] JIAN Ming, LIU Tong, Inventory sharing strategy of loss averse retailer, Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 23, 9, pp. 2012-2019, (2017)
12345