Multi-Dimensional Value Assessment for Decision Making

Abstract : Decision analysis is a tool that can be used to improve the quality of complex decisions in an uncertain environment. A decision analysis is constructed by specifying alternative courses of action and the possible consequences of action. Each of the consequences is evaluated in terms of its relative probability of occurrence and its value to the decision maker if it should occur. Decision analysis has been used primarily in business settings where values of consequences can be measured in terms of dollars. In non- business environments, however, non-monetary criteria may be of paramount importance. The situation is further complicated if relevant values vary along more than a single dimension. The paper reviews the psychological literature on the problem of assigning numerical values when several value attributes (or criteria) are relevant to the decision maker.

[1]  G. Huber,et al.  A study of self‐explicated utility models , 1970 .

[2]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgment. , 1971 .

[3]  J R Miller,et al.  ASSESSING ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS , 1969 .

[4]  D. B. Yntema,et al.  Man-Computer Cooperation in Decisions Requiring Common Sense , 1961 .

[5]  N. Anderson,et al.  Averaging model analysis of set-size effect in impression formation. , 1967, Journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  H. J. Einhorn.  The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making. , 1970, Psychological bulletin.

[7]  David L. Ford,et al.  An empirical comparison of five utility models for predicting job preferences , 1971 .

[8]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[9]  David L. Ford,et al.  A study of subjective evaluation models , 1969 .

[10]  Lincoln E. Moses,et al.  Elementary Decision Theory , 1959 .

[11]  J. B. Sidowski,et al.  Judgments of City-Occupation combinations , 1967 .

[12]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Independence in Utility Theory with Whole Product Sets , 1965 .

[13]  Ward Edwards,et al.  Probabilistic Information Processing Systems: Design and Evaluation , 1968, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern..

[14]  N. Anderson.  Functional measurement and psychophysical judgment. , 1970, Psychological review.

[15]  E. H. Bowman.  Consistency and Optimality in Managerial Decision Making , 1963 .

[16]  Yutaka Sayeki,et al.  ALLOCATION OF IMPORTANCE: AN AXIOM SYSTEM, , 1972 .

[17]  RISKLESS CHOICEY,et al.  A Model of Riskless Choice , 2008 .

[18]  A. Tversky.  Intransitivity of preferences. , 1969 .

[19]  P. Slovic,et al.  Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. , 1971 .

[20]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  Decision Making: An Experimental Approach , 1959 .

[21]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey. , 1958 .

[22]  A. Tversky,et al.  Conjoint-measurement analysis of composition rules in psychology. , 1971 .

[23]  Wayne Lee,et al.  Decision theory and human behavior , 1971 .

[24]  Ward Edwards,et al.  JUDGE: A laboratory evaluation☆ , 1969 .

[25]  L. R. Goldberg.  Simple models or simple processes? Some research on clinical judgments. , 1968, The American psychologist.

[26]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  The Foundations of Decision Analysis , 1968, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern..

[27]  A. Tversky.  Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. , 1972 .

[28]  K R MacCrimmon,et al.  Decisionmaking among Multiple-Attribute Alternatives: A Survey and Consolidated Approach , 1968 .

[29]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[30]  A. Tversky.  Additivity, utility, and subjective probability , 1967 .

[31]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Test of a conflict model for preference judgment , 1969 .

[32]  Karl H. Vesper,et al.  Allocation of Importance and Goal-Dependent Utility, , 1971 .

[33]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Utility Independence and Preferences for Multiattributed Consequences , 1971, Oper. Res..

[34]  R. Dawes.  SOCIAL SELECTION BASED ON MULTIDIMENSIONAL CRITERIA. , 1964, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[35]  Robert T. Eckenrode,et al.  Weighting Multiple Criteria , 1965 .

[36]  J. Milnor,et al.  AN AXIOMATIC APPROACH TO MEASURABLE UTILITY , 1953 .

[37]  R. Luce,et al.  Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement , 1964 .

[38]  S. Himmelfarb,et al.  Forming impressions of social class: two tests of an averaging model. , 1969, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[39]  W. Edwards,et al.  Emerging technologies for making decisions , 1965 .

[40]  R. Shepard,et al.  Learning and memorization of classifications. , 1961 .