IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v259y2017i1p229-235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Road to robust prediction of choices in deterministic MCDM

Author

Listed:
  • Pajala, Tommi
  • Korhonen, Pekka
  • Wallenius, Jyrki

Abstract

We compare five different prediction methods (linear estimated weights, AHP weights, equal weights, logistic regression, and a lexicographic method) in their success rate for predicting preferences in pairwise choices. Students were asked to make pairwise comparisons between student apartments on four criteria: size, rent, travel time to the university and travel time to a (hobby) location of their choice. First ten choices were used to set up the estimation model, and subsequent ten choices are used for prediction. We find that the linear estimation method has the highest prediction success rate. Furthermore, the probability of predicting a choice correctly differs only slightly (by 0.1) between linear consistent and inconsistent subjects, ie. subjects whose preferences were consistent or inconsistent with a linear value function. This shows that in the absence of other preference information, a linear value function is suitable for prediction purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Pajala, Tommi & Korhonen, Pekka & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2017. "Road to robust prediction of choices in deterministic MCDM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 229-235.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:259:y:2017:i:1:p:229-235
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221716308141
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Einhorn, Hj & Hogarth, Rm, 1981. "Behavioral Decision-Theory - Processes Of Judgment And Choice," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 1-31.
    2. Hadfield, Jarrod D., 2010. "MCMC Methods for Multi-Response Generalized Linear Mixed Models: The MCMCglmm R Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 33(i02).
    3. Korhonen, Pekka J. & Silvennoinen, Kari & Wallenius, Jyrki & Öörni, Anssi, 2012. "Can a linear value function explain choices? An experimental study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(2), pages 360-367.
    4. Pekka Korhonen & Kari Silvennoinen & Jyrki Wallenius & Anssi Öörni, 2013. "A careful look at the importance of criteria and weights," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 565-578, December.
    5. Stanley Zionts & Jyrki Wallenius, 1976. "An Interactive Programming Method for Solving the Multiple Criteria Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 652-663, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matteo Brunelli & Michele Fedrizzi, 2019. "A general formulation for some inconsistency indices of pairwise comparisons," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 155-169, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Korhonen, Pekka J. & Silvennoinen, Kari & Wallenius, Jyrki & Öörni, Anssi, 2012. "Can a linear value function explain choices? An experimental study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(2), pages 360-367.
    2. Eom, Sean B., 1998. "Relationships between the decision support system subspecialities and reference disciplines: An empirical investigation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 31-45, January.
    3. Mingyue Li & Jingjing Wang & Kai Chen & Lianbei Wu, 2020. "Willingness and Behaviors of Farmers’ Green Disposal of Pesticide Packaging Waste in Henan, China: A Perceived Value Formation Mechanism Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Gerd Gigerenzer, 1997. "Bounded Rationality: Models of Fast and Frugal Inference," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 133(II), pages 201-218, June.
    5. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    6. I. Albarrán & P. Alonso-González & J. M. Marin, 2017. "Some criticism to a general model in Solvency II: an explanation from a clustering point of view," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1289-1308, June.
    7. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    8. Andrés López-Sepulcre & Sebastiano De Bona & Janne K. Valkonen & Kate D.L. Umbers & Johanna Mappes, 2015. "Item Response Trees: a recommended method for analyzing categorical data in behavioral studies," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1268-1273.
    9. Jesse Shore & Ethan Bernstein & David Lazer, 2014. "Facts and Figuring: An Experimental Investigation of Network Structure and Performance in Information and Solution Spaces," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-075, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2014.
    10. S. Larsson & G. R. Chesley, 1986. "An analysis of the auditor's uncertainty about probabilities," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 259-282, March.
    11. Bakar, Khandoker Shuvo & Sahu, Sujit K., 2015. "spTimer: Spatio-Temporal Bayesian Modeling Using R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 63(i15).
    12. Yu‐Lin Hsu & Gavin C. Reid, 2021. "Two‐stage decision‐making within the firm: Analysis and case studies," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(6), pages 1355-1373, September.
    13. Torres-Rojo, J. M., 2001. "Risk management in the design of a feeding ration: a portfolio theory approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 1-20, April.
    14. Karen Green & Benson Wier, 2015. "Influence of Ethical Position and Information Asymmetry on Transfer Price Negotiations," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-30, February.
    15. Arnold, Vicky & Bedard, Jean C. & Phillips, Jillian R. & Sutton, Steve G., 2011. "Do section 404 disclosures affect investors' perceptions of information systems reliability and stock price predictions?," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 243-258.
    16. Pereira, Miguel Alves & Figueira, José Rui & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2020. "Using a Choquet integral-based approach for incorporating decision-maker’s preference judgments in a Data Envelopment Analysis model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 1016-1030.
    17. Deparis, Stéphane & Mousseau, Vincent & Öztürk, Meltem & Huron, Caroline, 2015. "The effect of bi-criteria conflict on matching-elicited preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 951-959.
    18. Sahay, Arvind, 2013. "A Customer Oriented Approach To Identifying Competitive Advantage," IIMA Working Papers WP2013-05-08, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    19. Amoroso, S., 2013. "Heterogeneity of innovative, collaborative, and productive firm-level processes," Other publications TiSEM f5784a49-7053-401d-855d-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Nowak, Maciej, 2007. "Aspiration level approach in stochastic MCDM problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1626-1640, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:259:y:2017:i:1:p:229-235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.