Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Examine Judgment Consistency in a Complex Multiattribute Task

This paper investigates the impact of framing and time pressure on human judgment performance in a complex multiattribute judgment task. We focus on the decision process of human participants who must choose between pairwise alternatives in a resource-allocation task. We used the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to calculate the relative weights of the four alternatives (i.e., C1, C2, C3, and C4) and the judgment consistency. Using the AHP, we examined two sets of hypotheses that address the impact of task conditions on the weight prioritization of choice alternatives and the internal consistency of the judgment behavior under varying task conditions. The experiment simulated the allocation of robotic assets across the battlefield to collect data about an enemy. Participants had to make a judgment about which asset to allocate to a new area by taking into account three criteria related to the likelihood of success. We manipulated the information frame and the nature of the task. We found that, in general, participants gave significantly different weights to the same alternatives under different frames and task conditions. Specifically, in terms of ln-transformed priority weights, participants gave significantly lower weights to C2 and C4 and higher weight to C3 under gain frame than under loss frame, and also, under different task conditions (i.e., Tasks #1, #2, and #3), participants gave significantly higher weight to C4 in Task #1, lower weights to C1 and C4, higher weight to C3 in Task #2, and lower weight to C3 in Task #3. Furthermore, we found that the internal consistency of the decision behavior was worse, first, in the loss frame than the gain frame and, second, under time pressure. Our methodology complements utility-theoretic frameworks by assessing judgment consistency without requiring the use of task-performance outcomes. This work is a step toward establishing a coherence criterion to investigate judgment under naturalistic conditions. The results will be useful for the design of multiattribute interfaces and decision aiding tools for real-time judgments in time-pressured task environments.

[1]  G. Robert J. Hockey,et al.  State, Stress, and Time Pressure , 1993 .

[2]  John Aitchison,et al.  The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data , 1986 .

[3]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Visions of rationality , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  T. Saaty An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” , 1990 .

[5]  J. Dyer Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process , 1990 .

[6]  G. Gescheider Psychophysics: The Fundamentals , 1997 .

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

[8]  H. Simon,et al.  Theories of Decision-Making in Economics and Behavioural Science , 1966 .

[9]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[10]  D. A. Mitta,et al.  An Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Rank-Ordering of Computer Interfaces , 1993 .

[11]  Ari Riabacke,et al.  A Study on Framing Effects in Risk Elicitation , 2005, International Conference on Computational Intelligence for Modelling, Control and Automation and International Conference on Intelligent Agents, Web Technologies and Internet Commerce (CIMCA-IAWTIC'06).

[12]  James S. Dyer,et al.  A clarification of “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” , 1990 .

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

[14]  D. Kahneman A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[15]  Nicholas J. Aebischer,et al.  Compositional Analysis of Habitat Use From Animal Radio-Tracking Data , 1993 .

[16]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Prediction, Projection And Forecasting , 1990 .

[17]  Jianbiao Li,et al.  An experimental study on investors' status quo bias , 2009 .

[18]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[20]  Marco Remondino,et al.  Modeling Cognitive Distortions of Behavioural Finance , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computational Intelligence, Modelling and Simulation.

[21]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The Adaptive Decision-Maker : Effort and Accuracy in Choice , 2022 .

[22]  Paul J. H. Schoemaker,et al.  Determinants of risk-taking: Behavioral and economic views , 1993 .

[23]  Thomas E. Nygren,et al.  Framing of Task Performance Strategies: Effects on Performance in a Multiattribute Dynamic Decision Making Environment , 1997, Hum. Factors.

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

[25]  J. Guilford Psychometric methods, 2nd ed. , 1954 .

[26]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Reply to “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” by J. S. Dyer , 1990 .

[27]  Jyh-Rong Chou,et al.  A Gestalt-like perceptual measure for home page design using a fuzzy entropy approach , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[28]  G Gigerenzer,et al.  Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. , 1996, Psychological review.

[29]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Development of a Methodology for Optimizing the Elicited Knowledge , 1993, HCI.

[30]  Jeffrey L. Beck,et al.  Diet Composition, Forage Selection, and Potential for Forage Competition Among Elk, Deer, and Livestock on Aspen–Sagebrush Summer Range , 2005 .

[31]  Wang Framing Effects: Dynamics and Task Domains , 1996, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[32]  D. Frisch Reasons for framing effects. , 1993 .

[33]  Peter Wright The harassed decision maker: Time pressures, distractions, and the use of evidence. , 1974 .

[34]  Mansooreh Mollaghasemi,et al.  Usability engineering of virtual environments (VEs): identifying multiple criteria that drive effective VE system design , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[35]  L. Nan,et al.  The Experimentation of Bounded Rationality Behavior in Individual Decision-making , 2007, 2007 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering.

[36]  D. Henry,et al.  Describing treatment effects to patients , 2003, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[37]  Raanan Lipshitz,et al.  Converging themes in the study of decision making in realistic settings. , 1993 .

[38]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  The theory of ratio scale estimation: Saaty's analytic hierarchy process , 1987 .

[39]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Prediction, projection and forecasting : applications of the analytic hierarchy process in economics, finance, politics, games and sports , 1991 .

[40]  Kenneth R. Hammond Generalization in Operational Contexts: What Does It Mean? Can It be Done? , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[41]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making. , 1988 .

[42]  E. Spires Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Analyze Multiattribute Decisions. , 1991, Multivariate behavioral research.

[43]  Robert M. R. Barclay,et al.  Trumpeter swan behaviour at spring-migration stopover areas in southern Alberta , 2001 .