IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Capturing decision maker preference: Experimental comparison of decision analysis and MCDM techniques


  • Corner, J. L.
  • Buchanan, J. T.


No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Corner, J. L. & Buchanan, J. T., 1997. "Capturing decision maker preference: Experimental comparison of decision analysis and MCDM techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 85-97, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:98:y:1997:i:1:p:85-97

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Buchanan, J. T. & Daellenbach, H. G., 1987. "A comparative evaluation of interactive solution methods for multiple objective decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 353-359, June.
    2. Kimbrough, Steven O. & Weber, Martin, 1994. "An empirical comparison of utility assessment programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 617-633, June.
    3. Paul J. H. Schoemaker & C. Carter Waid, 1982. "An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 182-196, February.
    4. Belton, Valerie, 1986. "A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute value function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 7-21, July.
    5. Stanley Zionts & Jyrki Wallenius, 1983. "An Interactive Multiple Objective Linear Programming Method for a Class of Underlying Nonlinear Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 519-529, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Bell, Michelle L. & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Ellis, Hugh, 2003. "The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in the integrated assessment of climate change: implications for IA practitioners," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 289-316, December.
    2. Buchanan, John & Gardiner, Lorraine, 2003. "A comparison of two reference point methods in multiple objective mathematical programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(1), pages 17-34, August.
    3. Behnam Malakooti, 2015. "Double Helix Value Functions, Ordinal/Cardinal Approach, Additive Utility Functions, Multiple Criteria, Decision Paradigm, Process, and Types (Z Theory I)," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1353-1400, November.
    4. Aloysius, John A. & Davis, Fred D. & Wilson, Darryl D. & Ross Taylor, A. & Kottemann, Jeffrey E., 2006. "User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: The impact of preference elicitation techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 273-285, February.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:98:y:1997:i:1:p:85-97. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.