A comparative study of three methods of eliciting preference information

Mary Anne Rothermel and David A Schilling

Omega, 1984, vol. 12, issue 4, 379-389

Abstract: The study reported in this paper compared three methods of eliciting preference information from a decision maker and estimating weights with this information for use in a multiple objective decision making model. The design of the study included issues of implementing computerized interactive models vs more traditional question and answer techniques in the light of different decision models (in terms of level of complexity) and differing levels of decision maker experience. Results indicate that decision makers, regardless of prior exposure to computer terminals, are not intimidated by their use. Additionally, methods which required non-quantitative statements of preferences were preferred over techniques which requested numerical estimates of tradeoffs or marginal rates of substitution between objectives.

Date: 1984
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0305-0483(84)90074-4
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jomega:v:12:y:1984:i:4:p:379-389

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
https://shop.elsevie ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

Access Statistics for this article

Omega is currently edited by B. Lev

More articles in Omega from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().