The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurements
Management SciencePublished 1 August 1993
Rüdiger von Nitzsch, Martin Weber
Citations179
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score5.72
SNIP2.88
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
Abstract
Multiattribute utility theory requires a specific relation between the range of outcomes of each attribute and the weight for that attribute. The greater the range, the greater the weight has to be. Experimental results show that subjects do not adjust their judgments properly if the range is varied. For the two methods tested the adjustment is smaller than required by theory. The bias was smaller for a regression procedure than for the direct ratio method. Weights based on an intuitive range were not found to be superior to those elicited over different ranges.
Keywords
Computer ScienceDecision SciencesEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
Journal of the Operational Research SocietyDecisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs.
8,440 Citations1994Ralph L. Keeney, Howard Raiffa +1 more
Medical Entomology and ZoologyDecision analysis and behavioral research
3,065 Citations1986Detlof von Winterfeldt, Ward Edwards
Cambridge University Press eBooksConservatism in human information processing
1,040 Citations1982Ward Edwards
A number of experiments show that a major cause of conservatism is human misaggregation of the data, which means men perceive each datum accurately and are well aware of its individual diagnostic meaning, but are unable to combine its diagnostic meaning well with the diagnostic meaning of other data when revising their opinions.
Psychological ReviewAmbiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inference.
796 Citations1985Hillel J. Einhorn, Robin M. Hogarth
Decision SciencesA COMPARISON OF WEIGHTING METHODS IN POWER PLANT SITING*
162 Citations1980Benjamin F. Hobbs
Management SciencePreferences for Proxy Attributes
65 Citations1987Gregory W. Fischer, Nirmala Damodaran +2 more
Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & PerformanceInvestigating the effect of stimulus range on attribute weight.
43 Citations1991Jane Beattie, Jonathan Baron
The results support the classical view of decision making: that attribute weights exist independent of situational demands, and that Ss' judgments are not influenced by irrelevant stimuli.
Are Important Weights Sensitive to the Range of Alternatives in Multiattribute Utility Measurement
25 Citations1978Jr. Gabrielli, Von Winterfeldt William F. +1 more
Memory & CognitionInvariance of the weight parameter in information integration
23 Citations1976Irwin P. Levin, Kyung Ja Kim +1 more
Students who were instructed to use a 2∶1 weighting were found to assign more than twice as much weight to the final as to the midterm, while subjects rated the performance of students on the basis of midterm exam scores and final exam scores.
Bandbreiten-Effekte bei der Bestimmung von Zielgewichten
10 Citations1992Rüdiger von Nitzsch, Matthias Weber