MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

Uncertainty from a finished study: when to tell people again

1979The past, rebuiltDeadline · Within 14 days before the first contact decision

Reconstruction of the past

The data reference date is 1979-04-19. Only the original texts of that time that are explicitly stated are used as background; the three situational premises and the later analysis are invented. Actual outcomes, amended systems, and success stories known later are not used as facts of the initial input. This is a modern retrospective framing, not a claim that people of that time made this decision.

The question to decide

A finished study has newly revealed uncertainty that could matter to former participants' judgments, but who it affects is not yet known. Announcing it widely may cause needless anxiety or expose participation; waiting for confirmation delays the stakeholder's own choices. Who should be contacted, and when?

Who decidesFictional research institute participant relations meeting

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Contact all past participants

    Gives a direct chance to judge the new information, but takes on the anxiety of uninvolved people and the exposure of past participation.

  2. Option 2

    Contact those most likely to be affected first

    Concentrates the initial resources, but if the classification is wrong, important information may reach people late.

  3. Option 3

    Confirm the scope of impact further, then contact

    Raises the accuracy of the explanation, but postpones the stakeholder's chance to choose during the confirmation period.

The situation as it stands

The fictional institute found a new uncertainty that past participants may consider important to their judgment, but could not confirm the scope of its impact. Decision deadline: within 14 days until the first contact decision.

Reconstruction of the past as of 1979-04-19 · New Uncertainties are disclosed again to participants who have finished the study. It is a fictional case newly created from the principles of documents of that time. The organizations, people, figures, and events shown are not records of real Decision-making.

  1. Premise 1The fictional institute found a new uncertainty that past participants may consider important to their judgment, but could not confirm the scope of its impact.
  2. Premise 2Participant contact details remain, but being contacted again after the study was never discussed in concrete terms.
  3. Premise 3Contacting everyone spreads the information widely, but can create anxiety that has nothing to do with the person and can reveal past participation to family.

Where it holdsContact after the study ends, new information, personal records

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1The extent to which the new information actually changes choices
  2. Unknown 2A channel that can reach only the participant themself
  3. Unknown 3The time and uncertainty needed to confirm the impact

Signals to decide again

  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window can establish "the extent to which the new information actually changes choices," and re-judge when a new finding changes the tradeoff among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window can establish "a channel that can reach only the participant themself," and re-judge when a new finding changes the tradeoff among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window can establish "the time and uncertainty needed to confirm the impact," and re-judge when a new finding changes the tradeoff among the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

Evidence emerged that the same question could matter even for participants classified as unlikely to be affected.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

One participant objected that the fact of their past participation had been passed on to their family.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Asclepius

How does the expansion of healing change the community's promises about distribution?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-HEALTH-33 · version 1.5.0
Content identity, SHA-256
feab9db6f3b6d459e2612e8a24f309a5bb35a76c50bcbb91b833bfcbc75d0b1c
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com