On preference elicitation processes which mitigate the accumulation of biases in multi-criteria decision analysis

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

zbMATH Keywords

multi-criteria decision analysis; preference elicitation; behavioural OR; biases; path perspective

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

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