This is a part 2, of the paper write about how the papers you reviewed relate to the decision analysis scholarly literature. Specifically, look at
articles referenced (cited) by the papers you read in part 1
articles that cite or refer to the papers you read in part 1 (some have very few references or even 0, some have more)
Question 1: Scholarly papers often start with and then build on or extend or ehance concepts or techniques that someone else has already developed. The papers you read in part 1 used some specific methods that were developed in previous papers (e.g., by other authors). What are the key methods and concepts from which previous papers were built on in the papers you read for in part 1? This will require you to distinguish between references that are included merely for the sake of background or completeness, vs. specific prior work that enabled the work in the papers from part 1 to be executed.
Question 2: Of all the ideas concepts techniques and results contained in the papers you read for part 1, describe what kind of articles are citing each one of them (or, if the paper has very few citations, you can just say that), and why (what specific issues in the papers from part 1 are being addressed by newer papers).
To give you a sense of what to look for, some articles merely cite for completeness. For example, an article might have a long list of papers “value of information has long been used in decision analysis, see Raiffa, 1968, Menke, 1975, Keisler 2003, Baker, 2015, etc.). Some articles are cited with more precision, e.g., “Keisler (2010) used a formulation where the results followed a binomial distribution, as we will here” You can find papers that cite the papers from part 1 by going to scholar google, searching for the paper you read for part 1 and then underneath the abstract for the article there is a link which has text like “cited by 19” and if you click that link you will see all papers that cite the one you searched.
These two parts should be about 2 pages each
