On preference elicitation processes which mitigate the accumulation of biases in multi-criteria decision analysis
From MaRDI portal
Publication:2282505
DOI10.1016/j.ejor.2019.09.004zbMath1431.91112WikidataQ127286163 ScholiaQ127286163MaRDI QIDQ2282505
Raimo P. Hämäläinen, Cosmo Jenytin, Tuomas J. Lahtinen
Publication date: 8 January 2020
Published in: European Journal of Operational Research (Search for Journal in Brave)
Full work available at URL: https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/42957
91B06: Decision theory
Related Items
Best-worst tradeoff method, Online multi-criteria portfolio analysis through compromise programming models built on the underlying principles of fuzzy outranking, Analyzing anchoring bias in attribute weight elicitation of SMART, Swing, and best‐worst method, Time-consistent portfolio optimization, Taking stock of behavioural OR: a review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus, Testing the effectiveness of debiasing techniques to reduce overprecision in the elicitation of subjective continuous probability distributions, What causes post-decision disappointment? Estimating the contributions of systematic and selection biases
Cites Work
- Path dependence and biases in the even swaps decision analysis method
- Evaluation and refinement of aspiration-based methods in MCDM
- Loss aversion and scale compatibility in two-attribute trade-offs
- On the importance of behavioral operational research: the case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems
- The effect of bi-criteria conflict on matching-elicited preferences
- Making Descriptive Use of Prospect Theory to Improve the Prescriptive Use of Expected Utility
- Using a Bayesian Approach to Quantify Scale Compatibility Bias
- Optimal Conflict in Preference Assessment
- Goal programming and cognitive biases in decision-making
- Inconsistent Trade-Offs Between Attributes: New Evidence in Preference Assessment Biases
- “Bi-Matching”: A New Preference Assessment Method to Reduce Compatibility Effects
- Robustness of Additive Value Function Methods in MCDM