The purpose of the research was the development of a questionnaire that can measure the behaviour of groups of students (for instance departments' cohorts) in Personal Information Management (PIM). Variables for the questionnaire were derived from the international literature on PIM. The questionnaire has been tested out on 79 students (last year before graduation) from four different departments of the Academy of ICT&Media at The Hague University of Applied Sciences. The students' responses were checked on consistency, item non response, desirability bias and information value of the results. All these criteria indicated that the questionnaire is an adequate tool for the assessment of PIM at an institutional level. The results that have been found for the four departments have not yet been discussed with the managers of the Academy and those of the individual departments. [De hier gepubliceerde versie is het 'accepted paper' van het origineel dat is gepubliceerd op www.springerlink.com . De officiële publicatie kan worden gedownload op http://www.springerlink.com/content/n0h3k71u85024xnt/]
This thesis provides an examination of judgement autonomy of Dutch commercial real estate valuers in relation to client orientation. The valuation of commercial real estate such as offices or retail properties requires in-depth analysis due to its uniqueness by location, building type and usage details. Essentially, a register-valuer is qualified and instructed to assess a property value to one’s best cognitive effort and inform others of this outcome by means of a valuation report. In the Netherlands, concerns over independence risks and client-related judgement risks of valuers have been raised by regulative authorities as the Dutch Central Bank (DNB) and the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM). A significant part of these concerns followed the 2008 financial crisis, which appeared to be at least partially driven by unreliable and incomparable valuations of Dutch commercial real estate (AFM, 2014; DNB, 2012; 2015). Among other things, these concerns led to the instigation of the Nederlands Register Vastgoed Taxateurs (NRVT) in 2015. NRVT is a new Dutch central register of valuation practitioners set up in order to improve self-regulation, quality control and compliance of valuation practitioners. Currently, the chamber for commercial real estate valuation holds about 2,000 commercial valuation registrations (NRVT, 2020). The introduction of NRVT, and other measures taken, reflect an instrumental view towards enhancing professionalism of Dutch valuers. This view is based on a systematic orientation to professional conduct in which good practice is primarily objectively determined (Van Ewijk, 2019). However, Wassink and Bakker (2016) point out that individuals make personal choices in order to deal with work complexity. Insight into and reflection on individual choices is part of what is referred to as normative aspects of professionalisation: what norms prevail in individual judgement and decision-making and why (Van Ewijk, 2019). In this regard, insight into judgement reasoning of valuation practitioners may contribute to normative levels of professional development of valuers. The need for such is expressed through community concerns over how individual judgement autonomy may become subdued due to instrumental-driven developments taking place in the sector. The combination of authoritative concerns over professional quality in the Netherlands and lack of (scientific) insight on how client influence affects judgement in valuation practice poses a problem: How may practitioners address client-related judgement bias risks and improve valuation accuracy from this viewpoint, if little is known on how such risks may occur in daily practice? The seemingly scarce scientific insights available in this regard in the Netherlands may also prevent educational programs to adequately address valuer independence and objectivity risks in relevant training programs. In order to address this knowledge gap, the present PhD research examines the following research problem: 169 Summary “How does client orientation affect professional judgement autonomy of commercial real estate valuers in the Netherlands?” The term ‘client orientation’ should be broadly interpreted and may refer to valuers’ perception, understanding and meaning given to alleged, actual or anticipated client-related aspects. Information on such client aspects is not required for the performance of valuation instructions. It should also be noted that this research examines the context of how client orientation may affect valuer judgement reasoning patterns during work practice, yet not its effect in terms of decision on final value opinion.
MULTIFILE
BackgroundConfounding bias is a common concern in epidemiological research. Its presence is often determined by comparing exposure effects between univariable- and multivariable regression models, using an arbitrary threshold of a 10% difference to indicate confounding bias. However, many clinical researchers are not aware that the use of this change-in-estimate criterion may lead to wrong conclusions when applied to logistic regression coefficients. This is due to a statistical phenomenon called noncollapsibility, which manifests itself in logistic regression models. This paper aims to clarify the role of noncollapsibility in logistic regression and to provide guidance in determining the presence of confounding bias.MethodsA Monte Carlo simulation study was designed to uncover patterns of confounding bias and noncollapsibility effects in logistic regression. An empirical data example was used to illustrate the inability of the change-in-estimate criterion to distinguish confounding bias from noncollapsibility effects.ResultsThe simulation study showed that, depending on the sign and magnitude of the confounding bias and the noncollapsibility effect, the difference between the effect estimates from univariable- and multivariable regression models may underestimate or overestimate the magnitude of the confounding bias. Because of the noncollapsibility effect, multivariable regression analysis and inverse probability weighting provided different but valid estimates of the confounder-adjusted exposure effect. In our data example, confounding bias was underestimated by the change in estimate due to the presence of a noncollapsibility effect.ConclusionIn logistic regression, the difference between the univariable- and multivariable effect estimate might not only reflect confounding bias but also a noncollapsibility effect. Ideally, the set of confounders is determined at the study design phase and based on subject matter knowledge. To quantify confounding bias, one could compare the unadjusted exposure effect estimate and the estimate from an inverse probability weighted model.
MULTIFILE
![Causes of reporting bias: a theoretical framework [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]](https://publinova-harvester-content-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbnails/files/previews/pdf/20240419021423483168.68f_a863_4e94_84cd_cf2a63540cea_18310_jenny_van_der_stee-thumbnail-400x300.png)
