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.

Participating in research comes with no promise of benefit

1979The past, rebuiltDeadline · Within 45 days before the next support award

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

Research participation is being concentrated in one region because it is easy to contact and inexpensive. Even if the results are useful, no path for that region to receive the benefits has been agreed, and changing recruitment means re-assessing the study's appropriateness and cost. What conditions should research support carry so that the distribution of burdens and benefits is acceptable?

Who decidesFictional public research support review committee

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

    Keep the current recruitment plan

    Preserves continuity of data and operations, but leaves the problem that convenience concentrates the burden on one group.

  2. Option 2

    Reconstitute the recruitment group

    Changes the concentration of the burden, but takes on the re-review of the appropriateness of the questions and of the cost and participation conditions.

  3. Option 3

    Apply after agreeing on access to the benefits

    Exposes the conditions of distribution, but creates long-term commitments and delay costs for a study that has no results yet.

The situation as it stands

The fictional researcher proposed one region as the main recruitment target on the grounds that contact is easy and costs are low. Decision deadline: within 45 days until the next funding agreement.

Reconstruction of the past as of 1979-04-19 · One region bears the burden of the study while another receives the benefits. 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 researcher proposed one region as the main recruitment target on the grounds that contact is easy and costs are low.
  2. Premise 2Even if the study results are useful, the resources and pathways for that region to reach the real benefits of the results have not yet been agreed.
  3. Premise 3If the recruitment group changes, the appropriateness of the scientific question and the cost and the burden on participants must be reviewed again.

Where it holdsSelection of participants, research burden, conditions of access to results

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1Why the current recruitment is needed for the scientific question
  2. Unknown 2Who and what resources will actually secure access to the benefits
  3. Unknown 3The loss the recruitment change causes existing participants

Signals to decide again

  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window can establish "why the current recruitment is needed for the scientific question," and re-judge when a new finding changes the tradeoff among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window can establish "who and what resources will actually secure access to the benefits," and re-judge when a new finding changes the tradeoff among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window can establish "the loss the recruitment change causes existing participants," 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

The review showed that the reason for selecting that group relied more on administrative convenience than on the research question.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

The funding body agreed to publish the results free of charge, but stated that it would not provide the facilities for actual use.

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-32 · version 1.5.0
Content identity, SHA-256
63959143a57934be432b063d3963f33a19200f997b843fbbeff32d8dba8922ee
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com