IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v97y2020ics0264837719313286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the spatial representation affect criteria weights in environmental decision-making? Insights from a behavioral experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Ferretti, Valentina
  • Geneletti, Davide

Abstract

The need and interest to consider cognitive and motivational biases has been recognized in different disciplines (e.g. economics, decision theory, risk analysis) and has recently reached environmental decision-making. Within this domain, the intrinsic presence of a spatial dimension of both alternatives and criteria calls for the use of maps throughout the decision-making process to properly represent the spatial distribution of the features under analysis. This makes spatial Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) a particularly interesting domain to explore new dimensions of cognitive biases. This study proposes a behavioral experiment aimed at discovering to what extent the spatial visualization (i.e. maps) of criteria versus the non-spatial one (i.e. tables) can bias the weight elicitation phase of a spatial MCDA process. The experiment simulates a very common analysis in environmental and land use planning: land suitability analysis. Our findings show that there are significant consequences on how important we perceive a certain criterion to be, depending on whether it is represented as a map or as a table among a mix of maps and tables. Indeed, the map representation of the same criterion leads to higher weights attributed to that criterion compared to the table representation. Visualizing the same information as a map or as a table, although technically equivalent, is thus not psychologically equivalent for Decision Makers. The results of this experiment are expected to have implications for spatial decision-making processes, by generating better awareness on the impacts of map-mediated land suitability analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferretti, Valentina & Geneletti, Davide, 2020. "Does the spatial representation affect criteria weights in environmental decision-making? Insights from a behavioral experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719313286
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104613
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719313286
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104613?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. A Morton & B Fasolo, 2009. "Behavioural decision theory for multi-criteria decision analysis: a guided tour," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 268-275, February.
    2. Ferretti, Valentina & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2016. "Key challenges and meta-choices in designing and applying multi-criteria spatial decision support systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65368, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Gandino, E., 2018. "Co-designing the solution space for rural regeneration in a new World Heritage site: A Choice Experiments approachAuthor-Name: Ferretti, V," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1077-1091.
    4. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00874292 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Jason F. Shogren & Laura O. Taylor, 2008. "On Behavioral-Environmental Economics," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 26-44, Winter.
    6. Katie Steele & Yohay Carmel & Jean Cross & Chris Wilcox, 2009. "Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 26-33, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Bernard Roy & Roman Slowinski, 2013. "Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method," Post-Print hal-00874292, HAL.
    9. Weber, Martin & Borcherding, Katrin, 1993. "Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 1-12, May.
    10. Brad Carter & Claus Rinner, 2014. "Locally weighted linear combination in a vector geographic information system," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 343-361, July.
    11. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    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. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    2. Vilkkumaa, Eeva & Liesiö, Juuso, 2022. "What causes post-decision disappointment? Estimating the contributions of systematic and selection biases," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(2), pages 587-600.
    3. Alessandra Battisti & Maria Valese & Herbert Natta, 2022. "Indicators as Mediators for Environmental Decision Making: The Case Study of Alessandria," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, April.

    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. Ferretti, Valentina & Liu, Jun & Mousseau, V & Ouerdane, W, 2017. "Reference-based ranking procedure for environmental decision making: insights from an ex-post analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 85933, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    3. Ferretti, V., 2021. "Framing territorial regeneration decisions: Purpose, perspective and scope," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    4. Lienert, Judit & Duygan, Mert & Zheng, Jun, 2016. "Preference stability over time with multiple elicitation methods to support wastewater infrastructure decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 746-760.
    5. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    6. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    8. V. M. Jayasooriya & S. Muthukumaran & A. W. M. Ng & B. J. C. Perera, 2018. "Multi Criteria Decision Making in Selecting Stormwater Management Green Infrastructure for Industrial areas Part 2: A Case Study with TOPSIS," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(13), pages 4297-4312, October.
    9. Erica Vassoney & Andrea Mammoliti Mochet & Claudio Comoglio, 2020. "Multicriteria Analysis for the Assessment of Flow Release Scenarios from a Hydropower Plant in the Alpine Region," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(2), pages 637-651, January.
    10. Marttunen, Mika & Haag, Fridolin & Belton, Valerie & Mustajoki, Jyri & Lienert, Judit, 2019. "Methods to inform the development of concise objectives hierarchies in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 604-620.
    11. Fatima‐Zohra Younsi & Salem Chakhar & Alessio Ishizaka & Djamila Hamdadou & Omar Boussaid, 2020. "A Dominance‐Based Rough Set Approach for an Enhanced Assessment of Seasonal Influenza Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1323-1341, July.
    12. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    13. Alaa Alden Al Mohamed & Sobhi Al Mohamed & Moustafa Zino, 2023. "Application of fuzzy multicriteria decision-making model in selecting pandemic hospital site," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, December.
    14. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    15. Ewa Roszkowska, 2020. "The extention rank ordering criteria weighting methods in fuzzy enviroment," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 91-114.
    16. Katerina Kabassi, 2021. "Comparing Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models for Evaluating Environmental Education Programs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    18. Paulo Cesar Schotten & Leydiana Sousa Pereira & Danielle Costa Morais, 2022. "Credit granting sorting model for financial organizations," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    19. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    20. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Gomes, Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro, 2021. "A novel version of the TODIM method based on the exponential model of prospect theory: The ExpTODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(3), pages 1042-1055.

    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:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719313286. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.