Task Description:
Understanding factors that affect decision-making is important for our own lives as well as advising or helping others. Accordingly, this task provides students with an opportunity to synthesise the content knowledge of Topics 1-3 and make reflections on their own factors that have impacted important decisions. For a list of examples of big decisions, look at the attachment under the assessment tab and selectthree. You may also draw on observations of people in your household as a useful way of gaining insight into the drivers of your own behaviour. Students are encouraged to reflect deeply onwhichbiases andhowthey have impacted your decisions. The writing style of this assignment includes reflective writing which may include pronouns (I, my, etc).
You should include in your assignment:
a)An analysis of biases or limitations that influenced your own decision-making in your chosen examples
b)Explain those biases. Provide insight as to why these biases with examples
c)Describe what can be done to mitigate the negative impact of these biases in future decisions
d)An introduction and a conclusion
3313AFE Behavioural Economics Behavioural Reflection Paper Word length: 1,000 words (Maximum) Due Date: 26th August 2021 Weight: 25% Task Description: Understanding factors that affect decision-making is important for our own lives as well as advising or helping others. Accordingly, this task provides students with an opportunity to synthesise the content knowledge of Topics 1-3 and make reflections on their own factors that have impacted important decisions. For a list of examples of big decisions, look at the attachment under the assessment tab and select three. You may also draw on observations of people in your household as a useful way of gaining insight into the drivers of your own behaviour. Students are encouraged to reflect deeply on which biases and how they have impacted your decisions. The writing style of this assignment includes reflective writing which may include pronouns (I, my, etc). You should include in your assignment: a) An analysis of biases or limitations that influenced your own decision-making in your chosen examples b) Explain those biases. Provide insight as to why these biases with examples c) Describe what can be done to mitigate the negative impact of these biases in future decisions d) An introduction and a conclusion Marking Criteria: The guide for marking is shown on the next page. This sets out the criterion and standards that are required for particular levels of performance (and therefore marks). You should study these rubrics closely in order to understand what is required and how you will be marked for your work. As an academic assignment, accepted referencing conventions must be used in order to acknowledge the work of others used in producing your work. This will avoid plagiarism. If you are unfamiliar with referencing conventions, then see the GBS resource bank (available through learning@griffith). Referencing should follow APA guidelines. Submission: Your paper is to be submitted via the submission point on the Behavioural Economics Learning@Griffith page by the due date. Late submissions will attract penalties according to University policy. The file names must be in the form of student surname and student number (eg: Smith_s11111.pptx). If there are any technical issues, please contact the course convenor. The maximum word limit of 1,000 will be strictly adhered to (does not include reference list). Results Communication and Feedback It is recommended that students use the ‘Tutoring on Demand’ service in L@G to receive feedback on their paper before submission (more information found on L@G). Students will receive the marked essay within two weeks from presenting/submitting via the grade centre. This will document the performance against each of the criteria and advise you of your overall mark. In some cases, additional comments will be provided. 1 of 2 2 of 2 Rubric – Behavioural Reflection Paper (25%) Criterion Weight (100%) Excellent (85%-100%) Very Good (75% - 84.5%) Good (65% - 74.5%) Satisfactory (49% - 64.5%) Unsatisfactory (0% - 48.5%) Explaining Key Concepts and structuring a persuasive argument Proficiency in describing and explaining key concepts well as developing logical and persuasive arguments 30% Insightful choice of example decisions. Outstanding proficiency in describing and explaining key concepts and issues. Exceptional proficiency in developing logical and persuasive arguments Very good demonstrated proficiency in describing and explaining key concepts and issues. Highly proficient, logical and persuasive argument. Well demonstrated proficiency in describing and explaining key concepts and issues. Well demonstrated proficiency at developing a logical and persuasive argument. Some demonstrated proficiency in describing and explaining key concepts and issues. Basic proficiency in developing logical and persuasive arguments. Limited or no demonstrated proficiency in describing and explaining key concepts and issues. Limited or no demonstrated proficiency in developing a logical and persuasive argument. Insights and Reflection Ability to apply theory to own experiences. 40% Shows exceptionally deep reflection with complex links made from knowledge of behavioural biases to own experiences with longer term issues considered. Demonstrates to a high level the ability to reflect on 'what' and 'why' between behavioural bias knowledge and own experience. Demonstrates ability to make link between behavioural bias knowledge and own experience. Answers 'what' but not or only limited 'why'. Attempts to make the link between behavioural bias knowledge and own experiences but does not achieve this fully. No demonstrated reflection of behavioural bias knowledge presented nor appropriate application to case. Identification of ways to mitigate/adapt/moderate biases 20% Clearly identifies a variety of methods to mitigate the negative impact of biases on financial decisions. Identifies two to three methods to mitigate the negative impact of biases on financial decisions. Identifies two methods to mitigate the negative impact of biases on financial decisions. Identifies one method to mitigate the negative impact of biases on financial decisions. Identification of methods to mitigate the negative impact of biases on financial decisions is lacking. Presentation, grammar, structure, referencing Demonstrated English language proficiency, effective presentation, vocabulary, grammar and punctuation 10% Outstanding English language capability, including vocabulary grammar and punctuation. Outstanding proficiency in structuring the report to maintain a logical flow with coherent transitions and connections throughout. Outstanding demonstrated proficiency in use of quality references and accurate use of appropriate referencing style. Excellent English language capability, including vocabulary grammar and punctuation. Very high proficiency in structuring the report so as to maintain a logical flow with coherent transitions and connections throughout Very high demonstrated proficiency in use of quality references and accurate use of appropriate referencing style. Well-developed written English, including vocabulary, grammar and punctuation. Well-developed proficiency in structuring the report to maintain a logical flow with coherent transitions and connections throughout. Well-developed proficiency in use of quality references and accurate use of appropriate referencing style. Some demonstrated proficiency in written English language presentation including vocabulary, grammar and punctuation. Basic proficiency in structuring the report to maintain a logical flow with coherent transitions and connections throughout. Sound proficiency in use of quality references and accurate use of appropriate referencing style. Limited or a poor level of proficiency in written English language, presentation including vocabulary grammar and punctuation. Limited or no demonstrated proficiency in structuring the report to maintain a logical flow with coherent transitions and connections throughout. Significant lack of cohesion in the flow of text. Limited or no proficiency in use of quality references and accurate use of appropriate referencing style.