Premium
Decisional Conflict and User Acceptance of Multicriteria Decision‐Making Aids *
Author(s) -
Kottemann Jeffrey E.,
Davis Fred D.
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
decision sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.238
H-Index - 108
eISSN - 1540-5915
pISSN - 0011-7315
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1991.tb00371.x
Subject(s) - salience (neuroscience) , multiple criteria decision analysis , assertion , computer science , argument (complex analysis) , decision aids , management science , empirical research , function (biology) , operations research , artificial intelligence , mathematics , economics , medicine , biochemistry , chemistry , alternative medicine , pathology , evolutionary biology , biology , programming language , statistics
Despite the development of increasingly sophisticated and refined multicriteria decision‐making (MCDM) methods, an examination of the experimental evidence indicates that users most often prefer relatively unsophisticated methods. In this paper, we synthesize theories and empirical findings from the psychology of judgment and choice to provide a new theoretical explanation for such user preferences. Our argument centers on the assertion that the MCDM method preferred by decision makers is a function of the degree to which the method tends to introduce decisional conflict. The model we develop relates response mode, decision strategy, and the salience of decisional conflict to user preferences among decision aids. We then show that the model is consistent with empirical results in MCDM studies. Next, the role of decisional conflict in problem formulation aids is briefly discussed. Finally, we outline future research needed to thoroughly test the theoretical mechanisms we have proposed.