The impact of task complexity on information use in multi-attribute decision making

This study presents a process analysis of multi-attribute decision making. The decision problems concerned the selection of the most suitable candidate for a job opening. The problems varied in terms of complexity, i.e. the number of candidates and the number of attributes used to describe these alternatives. Results show that with an increasing number of alternatives, subjects (N = 48) used fewer attributes for the evaluation of alternatives, and made, on average, less references to the alternatives. The type of judgment most often used was absolute dimensional (comparison of an attribute to an absolute standard) and was used more often at the beginning than toward the end of the decision process. Overall, judgments were predominantly positive. The percentage of positive judgments decreased with increasing complexity, and toward the end of the decision process. Significantly more judgments, particularly positive ones, concerned the finally chosen alternative as compared to the rest of the alternatives. Finally, analysis of subjects' usage of decision rules revealed that increasing the number of alternatives resulted in an increasing use of elimination strategies. Implications of these findings for the design of decision aids will be discussed.     

Binary choice under instructions to select versus reject

Two experiments examine differences in binary choice under select versus reject instructions. Three aspects of the choice process are examined: commitment to the chosen alternative, absolute magnitude of attribute evaluations, and information distortion during the choice process. Although the findings support previously hypothesized causes (Study 1), these results are reversed when the decision alternatives are uniformly negative (Study 2a). Accompanying verbal protocols (Study 2b) provide additional insights into the underlying decision process. The results consistently support a compatibility effect. Whenever there is a match between the valences of the alternatives and of the decision strategy, namely selecting a positive alternative or rejecting a negative one, there is greater accentuation of attribute differences, higher certainty in the final choice, and more information distortion. Metaphorically, the choice process seems to flow more smoothly in the compatible conditions.     

Probabilistic Subset Conjunction

The authors introduce subset conjunction as a classification rule by which an acceptable alternative must satisfy some minimum number of criteria. The rule subsumes conjunctive and disjunctive decision strategies as special cases. Subset conjunction can be represented in a binary-response model, for example, in a logistic regression, using only main effects or only interaction effects. This results in a confounding of the main and interaction effects when there is little or no response error. With greater response error, a logistic regression, even if it gives a good fit to data, can produce parameter estimates that do not reflect the underlying decision process. The authors propose a model in which the binary classification of alternatives into acceptable/unacceptable categories is based on a probabilistic implementation of a subset-conjunctive process. The satisfaction of decision criteria biases the odds toward one outcome or the other. The authors then describe a two-stage choice model in which a (possibly large) set of alternatives is first reduced using a subset-conjunctive rule, after which an alternative is selected from this reduced set of items. They describe methods for estimating the unobserved consideration probabilities from classification and choice data, and illustrate the use of the models for cancer diagnosis and consumer choice. They report the results of simulations investigating estimation accuracy, incidence of local optima, and model fit. The authors thank the Editor, the Associate Editor, and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions, and also thank Asim Ansari and Raghuram Iyengar for their helpful comments. They also thank Sawtooth Software, McKinsey and Company, and Intelliquest for providing the PC choice data, and the University of Wisconsin for making the breast-cancer data available at the machine learning archives.     

Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: A frame of reference for the study of pre- and post-decision processes

Differentiation and Consolidation Theory of decision making models human decision making as an active process in which one alternative is gradually differentiated from other available alternatives. The theory is based on the assumption that it is not sufficient to choose the best alternative, but that a decision involves the selection and creation of a candidate that is sufficiently superior for a decision. This is achieved in differentiation processes which are wholistic, structural or process related. To exemplify, structural differentiation includes both facts and attractiveness restructuring. Following a decision, the theory predicts consolidation processes which work in favor of the chosen alternative. Both differentiation and consolidation are driven by the fact that through experience with the impredictability of the future, a decision maker has learned to prepare for threats against the chosen alternatives. The further this alternative has been differentiated and consolidated, the less the risk of post-decision ambiguity, regret or decision reversal. The study is concluded with references to othee decision theories some of which are viewed as subtheories of Differentiation and Consolidation Theory.     

Multi-attribute decision support and complexity: An evaluation and process analysis of aided versus unaided decision making

The present study addresses the effectiveness of a computerized decision aid (DECAID, Pitz 1987) based on the Multi-Attribute Utility Model (MAU). The effectiveness of DECAID was investigated for personnel selection problems varying in complexity (number of alternatives and number of attributes). Results show that the decision aid was most successful for problems of medium complexity. DECAID significantly affected the thoroughness of the decision, preference formation, and the perceived difficulty of the decision problem for medium complex problems. This was not the case for highly complex problems. Next, a process analysis is presented of unaided decision making focusing on the selection and evaluation of information. This process analysis of verbal protocols was based on the same decision problems as the first study. Results indicate that problem complexity had a significant impact on the decision process. Increasing complexity resulted in a less thorough evaluation, and selective information processing. Subjects tended to focus on one or two most promising alternatives. Furthermore, evaluation strategies diverged from those used in DECAID in terms of standard of comparison. The paper concludes with implications for the design of decision aids.     

On the Decision to Explore New Alternatives: The Coexistence of Under‐ and Over‐exploration

The decision whether to explore new alternatives or to choose from familiar ones is implicit in many of our daily activities. How is this decision made? When will deviation from optimal exploration be observed? The current paper examines exploration decisions in the context of a multi‐alternative “decisions from experience” task. In each trial, participants could choose a familiar option (the status quo) or a new alternative (risky exploration). The observed exploration rates were more sensitive to the frequent outcome from choosing new alternatives than to the average outcome. That is, the implicit decision whether to explore a new alternative reflects underweighting of rare events: Over‐exploration was documented in “Rare Disasters” environments, and insufficient exploration was evident in “Rare Treasures” environments. In addition, the results reveal a decrease in exploration of new alternatives over time even when it is always optimal and some exploration even when it is never reinforcing. These results can be captured with models that share a distinction between “data collection” and “outcome‐driven” decision modes. Under the data collection mode, the decision maker collects information about the environment, to be used in future choices. Under the outcome‐driven mode, the decision maker relies on small samples of previous experiences with familiar versus unfamiliar alternatives, before the selection of a specific alternative. The predictive value of a two‐parameter “explorative sampler” quantification of these assumptions is demonstrated. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The heterogeneous processes of cheating: Attention evidence from two eye tracking experiments

Dishonesty erodes society. Although much is known about dishonesty, the process leading up to the decision of whether to be honest or dishonest is often assumed to be homogenous and is not well understood. In this paper, we take a more nuanced approach and explore more closely the process of deciding whether to cheat or be honest when an opportunity to cheat arises. We do this in two laboratory eye tracking experiments. In our first experiment (n = 193), we identify heterogeneity in the decision to cheat. Some decisions on whether to cheat or be honest exhibit relatively little variation and appear to be oriented towards cheating (or honesty) with apparently little consideration of the alternative, whereas other decisions seem to be characterized by a higher degree of consideration for both decision alternatives. Our second experiment (n = 299) demonstrates that a gaze dependent intervention in the choices process is able to affect the behavioral outcomes.     

Coping with Unfavorable Attribute Values in Choice

This paper examines how decision makers cope when faced with trade-offs between a higher quality alternative and a lower price alternative in situations where both alternatives involve relatively unfavorable versus relatively favorable values for quality. We hypothesize that choices between alternatives defined by unfavorable quality values will generate negative emotion, resulting in emotion-focused coping behavior. Choosing the higher quality alternative (i.e., maximizing the quality attribute in choice) appears to function as a coping mechanism in these situations. These apparently coping-motivated choice effects are found even after methods are implemented to control for more cognitive factors associated with manipulations of quality-attribute value, such as the possibility that unfavorable attribute values are associated with increased attribute ranges and therefore increased relative importance for quality.     

Six of One, Half Dozen of the Other: Expanding and Contracting Numerical Dimensions Produces Preference Reversals

ABSTRACT— The scales used to describe the attributes of different choice options are usually open to alternative expressions, such as inches versus feet or minutes versus hours. More generally, a ratio scale can be multiplied by an arbitrary factor (e.g., 12) while preserving all of the information it conveys about different choice alternatives. We propose that expanded scales (e.g., price per year) lead decision makers to discriminate between choice options more than do contracted scales (e.g., price per month) because they exaggerate the difference between options on the expanded attribute. Two studies show that simply increasing the size of an attribute's scale systematically changes its weight in both multiattribute preferences and willingness to pay: Expanding scales for one attribute shifts preferences to alternatives favored on that attribute.     

Attribute‐based differentiation of alternatives

An intermediate step is introduced to the dialogue decision process for decision analysis. Alternatives are refined after they have been generated within a strategy table but before they are subject to more detailed evaluation. Two or more judges create a subjective mapping from alternatives to attributes that will later be mapped to criteria. In strategy tables, each of the alternative strategies consists of a coherent set of choices made across several decisions that are to be coordinated. These strategic alternatives are modified so as to increase their differentiation in the attribute space, rather than in the decision space alone. When criteria weights are unknown, the best alternative from the modified set may be superior to the best alternative from the original set. Furthermore, analysis of the resulting alternatives may yield a better mapping of the value response surface for the action space, in the sense that this mapping leads to eventual construction of a higher value alternative. Results are reported for a consulting engagement incorporating the proposed step. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effectiveness of Partial Information about Attribute Weights for Ranking Alternatives in Multiattribute Decision Making

Weighted additive evaluation functions are widely used to rank alternatives in decision making under certainty with multiple evaluation attributes. Some researchers have suggested that approximate attribute weights may be adequate to accurately rank alternatives. Use of approximate weights would simplify decision analysis since detailed elicitation of weights can be time consuming and controversial. This article investigates the degree to which partial information about the relative magnitudes of attribute weights is sufficient to rank alternatives as a function of the number of decision alternatives, the number of attributes, and the number of allowed levels for each attribute. A simulation analysis, as well as a reanalysis of an actual application, shows that partial information about weights is often not sufficient to determine the most preferred alternative for realistic decision problems. Hence, approximation procedures for specifying weights may lead to errors. However, our work also shows that a simple analysis procedure can be used to accurately determine whether partial information about weights is adequate to correctly specify the most preferred alternative. This procedure can be useful for identifying situations in which detailed elicitation of weights is not needed.     

Multicriteria approval: application of approval voting concepts to MCDM problems

Multicriteria decision making (MCDM) methods generally require information that is difficult and expensive to obtain. It is shown in this paper that given an ordering of criteria by importance, and whether each alternative is above the average evaluation of the alternatives for each criterion, considerable information can be extracted concerning the overall rankings of the alternatives. This is done by recognizing the similarity between criteria in MCDM, and voters in social choice theory. Multicriteria approval, proposed in this paper, is an MCDM adaptation of approval voting which can be used to classify decisions into one of several categories, depending on whether, and the manner in which, a superior alternative can be identified. An exhaustive examination of all possible decision situations of tractable size is made to measure the applicability of multicriteria approval, and the approach is demonstrated in an industrial procurement case. In addition to requiring minimal information from a decision maker, multicriteria approval satisfies several desirable criteria for MCDM techniques. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Role of Response Effort and Motion Study in Functionally Equivalent Task Designs and Alternatives

We evaluated the effects of functionally equivalent task designs and alternatives, as validated by motion study procedures, on dependent variables (nonadaptive responses, use of alternative, attempts at task, and completed attempts at task) relevant to performing a selected task. First, we evaluated the effects of functionally equivalent task designs on the dependent variables. Second, we evaluated the effects of an efficient functionally equivalent alternative on the variables. Third, we compared the effects of the efficient functionally equivalent alternative with a less efficient functionally equivalent alternative on the same variables. The results showed that the inefficient functionally equivalent task design occasioned higher rates of nonadaptive responses than the efficient functionally equivalent task design. The results also showed that the functionally equivalent task designs and alternatives competed within and across response classes to reduce nonadaptive responses. Mixed results were obtained in comparing the effects of the efficient versus the less efficient functionally equivalent alternatives. We provide evidence for extending the current concept of functional equivalence to include task design responses as well as alternative responses in functional equivalence training.     

Creating coherence in real‐life decision processes: Reasons,differentiation and consolidation

Svenson, O. & Jakobsson, M. (2009). Creating coherence in real‐life decision processes: Reasons, differentiation and consolidation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51, 93–102. Differentiation and Consolidation Theory describes human decision making as a process in which attractiveness values are restructured in order to reach a decision and support the decision made. Here, the theory was developed to include reasons pro and con alternatives and tested on students making decisions between two university psychotherapy training programs (cognitive‐behavioral and psychodynamic therapy). Before and also after the decision, the attractiveness of the chosen alternative was upgraded and the non‐chosen alternative downgraded. Different measures of evaluations of an alternative, such as “best” or “worse” converged over time until shortly after the decision. The number of reasons pro and con alternatives give a more complete picture than attractiveness and increased from the first to the last session. The reasons supporting the chosen alternative increased in strength, but reasons against the non‐chosen alternative decreased. In informal comments participants reported that the study also served as a decision aid.     

Information search and mental representation in risky decision making: The advantages first principle

In three experiments the problem is investigated how people identify early in the decision process those alternatives that are worthwhile to be examined in more detail. We assume that decision makers employ the Advantages first Principle: They first search for information about positive outcomes and then focus their information search (e.g., for negative consequences or for risk defusing operators) on those alternatives that appear attractive after this initial evaluation. In Experiment 1 (120 participants), initial information about consequences was varied for eight alternatives (no information, positive consequences, negative, or mixed for four alternatives). In all conditions, the great majority of participants followed both aspects of the Advantages first Principle. In Experiment 2, 60 participants decided in two quasi‐realistic scenarios with two alternatives each. Initial information was presented so that one alternative had better positive consequences, worse negative consequences, or both. In all conditions, more information was searched for in the initially better alternative. In Experiment 3 (20 participants) the Advantages first Principle was not only confirmed for a scenario but also for choices in traditional gambling tasks with two and eight alternatives, respectively. Participants could win or lose real money. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Time-varying decision boundaries: insights from optimality analysis

The most widely used account of decision-making proposes that people choose between alternatives by accumulating evidence in favor of each alternative until this evidence reaches a decision boundary. It is frequently assumed that this decision boundary stays constant during a decision, depending on the evidence collected but not on time. Recent experimental and theoretical work has challenged this assumption, showing that constant decision boundaries are, in some circumstances, sub-optimal. We introduce a theoretical model that facilitates identification of the optimal decision boundaries under a wide range of conditions. Time-varying optimal decision boundaries for our model are a result only of uncertainty over the difficulty of each trial and do not require decision deadlines or costs associated with collecting evidence, as assumed by previous authors. Furthermore, the shape of optimal decision boundaries depends on the difficulties of different decisions. When some trials are very difficult, optimal boundaries decrease with time, but for tasks that only include a mixture of easy and medium difficulty trials, the optimal boundaries increase or stay constant. We also show how this simple model can be extended to more complex decision-making tasks such as when people have unequal priors or when they can choose to opt out of decisions. The theoretical model presented here provides an important framework to understand how, why, and whether decision boundaries should change over time in experiments on decision-making.     

Self–other differences in multiattribute decision making: Compensatory versus noncompensatory decision strategies

When making decisions where options involve multiple attributes, a person can choose to use a compensatory, utility maximizing strategy, which involves consideration and integration of all available attributes. Alternatively, a person can choose a noncompensatory strategy that extracts only the most important and reliable attributes. The present research examined whether other‐oriented decisions would involve greater reliance on a noncompensatory, lexicographic decision strategy than self‐oriented decisions. In three studies (Mturk workers and college students), the difference in other‐oriented versus self‐oriented decisions in a medical decision context was explained by a subsample of participants that chose the death minimizing operation on all 10 decisions (Study 1) and a subsample of participants who self‐reported that they used a strategy that minimized the chance of death on every decision (i.e., a lexicographic mortality heuristic; Study 2). In Study 2, tests of mediation found that self‐reported use of the mortality heuristic completely accounted for the self–other effect on decisions. In Study 3, participants were more likely to report prospectively that they would adopt the mortality heuristic when making decisions for others than for themselves, suggesting that participants were not mistakenly inferring a lexicographic decision strategy from their past behavior. The results suggest that self–other effects in multiattribute choice involve differential use of compensatory versus noncompensatory decision strategies and that beyond this group difference, individual differences in the use of these strategies also exist within self‐oriented and other‐oriented decisions.     

Information search and decision making: The effects of information displays

Information display boards may be used to test assumptions about underlying cognitive processes in decision situations. However, the question may be raised whether information processing in a complex decision situation is indepemdent of the structure of the information display board used. In a study employing 96 subjects, the design of the information display board, the number of alternatives, and the number of attributes were varied. Twelve groups of eight subjects were presented with one hypothetical choice among riskless multiattribute decision alternatives (apartments). Results showed that information search patterns were not influenced by the design of the information display board, but that the relative number of attributes included in the decision process was. The number of available attributes appeared to be the strongest determinant of information search patterns. A higher number of attributes induced information search patterns consistent with the noncompensatory conjunctive decision rule. It is suggested that the decision situation employed, which forced the decision maker to remember each piece of information acquired, underlies the difference between the results in the present study and previous findings.