对多准则决策的绩效、生产力和合理性的调查

L. Volonino, P. Kirs
{"title":"对多准则决策的绩效、生产力和合理性的调查","authors":"L. Volonino, P. Kirs","doi":"10.1109/HICSS.1988.11883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The outcomes of multicriteria decisions are evaluated in terms of three distinct but interrelated measures: decision performance, decision-making productivity, and decision-maker rationality. Depending on whether subjects considered all of the criteria in their decisions or eliminated at least one, two groups of decision-makers emerged, called noneliminators, and eliminators. Their productivity was measured in terms of time and cognitive effort. The results indicate that eliminators consistently outperformed the noneliminators and had consistently higher confidence ratings as the number of alternatives increased. Noneliminators were significantly more productive timewise than eliminators. The degree of difference increased as the number of alternatives increased. Conversely, eliminators were significantly more productive in terms of cognitive effort, but the magnitude of the differences decreased drastically with increased alternatives.<<ETX>>","PeriodicalId":339507,"journal":{"name":"[1988] Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume III: Decision Support and Knowledge Based Systems Track","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An investigation of performance, productivity, and rationality in multi-criteria decision making\",\"authors\":\"L. Volonino, P. Kirs\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/HICSS.1988.11883\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The outcomes of multicriteria decisions are evaluated in terms of three distinct but interrelated measures: decision performance, decision-making productivity, and decision-maker rationality. Depending on whether subjects considered all of the criteria in their decisions or eliminated at least one, two groups of decision-makers emerged, called noneliminators, and eliminators. Their productivity was measured in terms of time and cognitive effort. The results indicate that eliminators consistently outperformed the noneliminators and had consistently higher confidence ratings as the number of alternatives increased. Noneliminators were significantly more productive timewise than eliminators. The degree of difference increased as the number of alternatives increased. Conversely, eliminators were significantly more productive in terms of cognitive effort, but the magnitude of the differences decreased drastically with increased alternatives.<<ETX>>\",\"PeriodicalId\":339507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"[1988] Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume III: Decision Support and Knowledge Based Systems Track\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"[1988] Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume III: Decision Support and Knowledge Based Systems Track\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.1988.11883\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"[1988] Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume III: Decision Support and Knowledge Based Systems Track","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.1988.11883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

多标准决策的结果根据三个不同但相互关联的指标进行评估:决策绩效、决策生产力和决策者合理性。根据受试者在做决定时是否考虑了所有的标准,或者至少剔除了一个标准,出现了两组决策者,称为非剔除者和剔除者。他们的工作效率是用时间和认知努力来衡量的。结果表明,随着备选方案数量的增加,排除者的表现始终优于非排除者,并且具有始终较高的信心评级。从时间上看,非消除者的生产效率明显高于消除者。差异程度随着备选方案数量的增加而增加。相反,在认知努力方面,消除者明显更有效率,但随着替代选项的增加,差异的幅度急剧下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An investigation of performance, productivity, and rationality in multi-criteria decision making
The outcomes of multicriteria decisions are evaluated in terms of three distinct but interrelated measures: decision performance, decision-making productivity, and decision-maker rationality. Depending on whether subjects considered all of the criteria in their decisions or eliminated at least one, two groups of decision-makers emerged, called noneliminators, and eliminators. Their productivity was measured in terms of time and cognitive effort. The results indicate that eliminators consistently outperformed the noneliminators and had consistently higher confidence ratings as the number of alternatives increased. Noneliminators were significantly more productive timewise than eliminators. The degree of difference increased as the number of alternatives increased. Conversely, eliminators were significantly more productive in terms of cognitive effort, but the magnitude of the differences decreased drastically with increased alternatives.<>
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信