Capturing decision maker preference: Experimental comparison of decision analysis and MCDM techniques

Abstract This paper describes the results of a laboratory study which investigates preference in decision making under certainty with multiple, conflicting objectives and continuous decision variables. Techniques for solving such problems are taken from the fields of decision analysis and optimization: the SMART technique for the former and both the NAIVE and Zionts-Wallenius techniques for the latter. The purpose of the experiment is to determine the ability of each technique to correctly capture decision maker preference. In addition, the relative preference of the decision maker for each technique was obtained. The experiment was conducted on a random sample of business school undergraduates and involved a decision with three criteria. The results give insight into the use of several techniques when confronted with decisions with multiple criteria.

[1]  Ward Edwards,et al.  How to Use Multiattribute Utility Measurement for Social Decisionmaking , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[2]  Ram Narasimhan,et al.  An Experimental Evaluation of Articulation of Preferences in Multiple Criterion Decision‐Making (MCDM) Methods , 1988 .

[3]  V. Tummala,et al.  A comparative study of multiattribute decision making methodologies , 1990 .

[4]  Robert Sandy,et al.  Statistics for Business and Economics , 1989 .

[5]  James Corner,et al.  Characteristics of Decisions in Decision Analysis Practice , 1995 .

[6]  C. C. Waid,et al.  An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility Models , 1982 .

[7]  Benjamin F. Hobbs,et al.  What Can We Learn from Experiments in Multiobjective Decision Analysis? , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[8]  Simon French,et al.  Interactive Multi-Objective Programming: Its Aims, Applications and Demands , 1984 .

[9]  B. Hobbs,et al.  Multicriteria methods for resource planning: an experimental comparison , 1994 .

[10]  John Buchanan,et al.  Experimental consideration of preference in decision making under certainty , 1995 .

[11]  O. Larichev.  Cognitive validity in design of decision‐aiding techniques , 1992 .

[12]  James Corner,et al.  The effects of anchoring in interactive MCDM solution methods , 1997, Comput. Oper. Res..

[13]  Steven O. Kimbrough,et al.  An empirical comparison of utility assessment programs , 1994 .

[14]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[15]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[16]  V. Belton.  A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute value function , 1986 .

[17]  Benjamin F. Hobbs,et al.  Does choice of multicriteria method matter? An experiment in water resources planning , 1992 .

[18]  W. Edwards.  How to Use Multi-Attribute Utility Measurement for Social Decision Making , 1976 .

[19]  Richard A. Johnson,et al.  Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis , 1983 .

[20]  R. S. Laundy,et al.  Multiple Criteria Optimisation: Theory, Computation and Application , 1989 .

[21]  J.Robert Newman.  Differential weighting in multiattribute utility measurement: When it should not and when it does make a difference , 1977 .

[22]  S. Zionts,et al.  An Interactive Multiple Objective Linear Programming Method for a Class of Underlying Nonlinear Utility Functions , 1983 .

[23]  Michael H. Kutner.  Applied Linear Statistical Models , 1974 .

[24]  James L. Corner,et al.  Decision Analysis Applications in the Operations Research Literature, 1970-1989 , 1991, Oper. Res..

[25]  David L. Olson,et al.  Review of Empirical Studies in Multiobjective Mathematical Programming: Subject Reflection of Nonlinear Utility and Learning , 1992 .

[26]  John Buchanan,et al.  An Experimental Evaluation of Interactive MCDM Methods and the Decision Making Process , 1994 .

[27]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[28]  H. G. Daellenbach,et al.  A comparative evaluation of interactive solution methods for multiple objective decision models , 1987 .

[29]  D. A. Seaver,et al.  A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making , 1981 .