Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T19:04:44.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Practical Value Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Ralph L. Keeney
Affiliation:
Fuqua School of Business, Duke University
Detlof von Winterfeldt
Affiliation:
Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California
Ralph F. Miles Jr.
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Detlof von Winterfeldt
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
Get access

Summary

ABSTRACT. Many complex decision problems require value judgments, and it is often useful to build formal models of these value judgments. Several models and assessment procedures exist for this task ranging from simple rating and weighting techniques to sophisticated multiattribute utility models that incorporate tradeoffs and risk attitudes. In this chapter, we argue that the choice of a value model and assessment procedure depends on the decision context, the purpose of the model, the quality of available value judgments, time, and other factors. We propose the notion of a practical value model that is useful for a given decision context and purpose, using simplifications and approximations, when appropriate. We then discuss practical considerations when choosing a value model, for example, when deciding whether a value model is additive over attributes or not. We also consider practical issues when choosing an assessment procedure, for example, when selecting equivalent-cost procedures versus rating and weighting procedures. We discuss several topics related to interacting with decision makers when constructing value models, and we conclude with the description of two generic practical value models that we have found useful in many past applications.

Two types of models are commonly used in decision analysis: consequence models incorporate the facts, judgments, and uncertainties inherent in decision problems to describe or predict possible consequences of alternatives and value models incorporate the values or value tradeoffs and risk tolerances to evaluate consequences. This chapter addresses the value modeling aspect of decision analysis.

Type
Chapter
Information
Advances in Decision Analysis
From Foundations to Applications
, pp. 232 - 252
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barron, F. H., Winterfeldt, D., and Fischer, G. W. (1984). Empirical and theoretical relationships between value and utility functions. Acta Psychologica, 56, 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, D., and Raiffa, H. (1988). Marginal value and intrinsic risk aversion. (1988). In Bell, D., Raiffa, H., and Tversky, A. (eds.) Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 384–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benthien, M. and von Winterfeldt, D. (2001). Using decision analysis to improve seismic rehabilitation decisions. Working Paper WP-01–01, Institute for Civic Enterprise, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Dyer, J. S. and Sarin, R. (1979). Measurable multiattribute value functions. Operations Research, 22, 810–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, W., and Newman, J. R. (1982). Multiattribute evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishburn, P. C. (1965). Independence in utility theory with whole product sets. Operations Research, 13, 28–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishburn, P. C. (1970). Utility theory for decision making. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H. (1999). Smart choices: A practical guide to making better decisions.Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Keeney, R. L. (1981). Analysis of preference dependencies among objectives. Operations Research, 29, 1105–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeney, R. L. (1988). Building models of values. European Journal of Operational Research, 37, 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley. Reprinted in 1993 by Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keeney, R. L., and Winterfeldt, D. (1994). Managing nuclear waste from power plants. Risk Analysis, 14, 107–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeney, R. L., See, K., and Winterfeldt, D. (2006). Evaluating interdisciplinary academic programs: With applications to U.S. graduate decision programs. Operations Research, 25, 1–16.Google Scholar
Keeney, R. L., and Winterfeldt, D. (2005). Evaluation of Capilano-Seymour tunnel project alternatives. Technical Report, submitted to the Greater Vancouver Regional District, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
Krantz, D. H. (1964). Conjoint measurement: The Luce-Tukey axiomatization and some extensions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 248–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., and Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement, Volume I. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Luce, R. D. and Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merkhofer, M. L. and Keeney, R. L. (1987). A multiattribute utility analysis of alternative sites for the disposal of nuclear waste. Risk Analysis, 7, 173–194CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, R. F. (1970). On the relationship among the utility of assets, the utility of consumption, and investment strategy in an uncertain, but time invariant world. In Lawrence, J. (Ed.). OR 69: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Operational Research. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., Coupey, E., and Johnson, E. J. (1992). A constructive process view of decision making: Multiple strategies in judgment and choice. Acta Psychologica, 80, 107–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., and Schkade, D. A. (1999). Measuring constructed preferences: Towards a building code. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19, 243–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratt, J. W. (1964). Risk aversion in the small and the large. Econometrica, 32, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuman, J., and Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Winterfeldt, D. (1979). Functional relationships between risky and riskless multiattribute utility functions. Technical Report No. 79–3. Social Science Research Institute, Los Angeles: University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Winterfeldt, D. and Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioral research.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Winterfeldt, D., Eppel, T., Adams, J., Neutra, R., DelPizzo, V. (2004). Managing potential heath risks from electric powerlines: A decision analysis caught in controversy. Risk Analysis, 24, 1487–1502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×