{"id":171747,"date":"2025-12-02T16:01:34","date_gmt":"2025-12-02T22:01:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tecscience.tec.mx\/en\/?p=171747"},"modified":"2025-12-09T10:40:54","modified_gmt":"2025-12-09T16:40:54","slug":"edmundo-molina","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tecscience.tec.mx\/en\/education-and-humanism\/edmundo-molina\/","title":{"rendered":"Edmundo Molina and the Science of Decision-Making Under Uncertainty"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Edmundo Molina says that if something defined his path, it was mathematics. That discipline opened doors for him until it turned him into one of the leading experts in decision science: a field that combines cognitive, economic, and mathematical sciences to study how individuals and organizations choose what to do when facing different scenarios.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to chairing the Society for Decision Making Under Deep Uncertainty (DMDU)<\/a>, made up of hundreds of scientists who apply mathematical models to issues such as natural resources, epidemiology, economic development, and security, he leads the Decision Science Research Center at the School of Government and Public Transformation<\/a> at Tecnol\u00f3gico de Monterrey.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

After studying civil engineering, working as an information systems consultant, and spending time at the Bank of Mexico, he received a scholarship to pursue a master\u2019s degree in mathematical modeling applied to public policy in the Netherlands. But the real turning point came at the RAND School of Public Policy, where he worked with Steven Popper and Rob Lampert, pioneers in simulating large-scale social systems.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cCreating evidence where it seems like none exists?\u201d I ask at the beginning. \u201cExactly. Complexity or uncertainty shouldn\u2019t prevent us from generating evidence that helps us figure out what to do, even with all the volatility that exists,\u201d he replies enthusiastically.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\r\n \r\n \"\"\r\n <\/picture>
\u201c<\/em>Uncertainty confuses and paralyzes us. In contrast, when we have complete information, our performance improves\u201d<\/em>, says Edmundo. (Photo: M\u00f3nica Gonz\u00e1lez \/ TecScience)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

How do you study decision-making through mathematics?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the Center we specialize in high-uncertainty contexts. We run neurocognitive experiments in which we present people with problems with different levels of ambiguity and study how they process information, what they pay attention to when making a decision, and how their performance varies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We want to understand how a simulation model can improve that process to generate policy recommendations that are sustainable and adaptable when the context changes or new information appears.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What conclusions have you drawn?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The more ambiguity there is, the worse our decisions tend to be. Uncertainty confuses and paralyzes us. In contrast, when we have complete information, our performance improves. Additionally, we have observed that when people use decision-support tools, they make better choices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n