Minds and Machines 16 (3):339-364 (2006)
Many quantitative scales are constructed using cutoffs on a continuum with scores assigned to the cutoffs. This paper develops a framework for using or constructing such scales from a decision-making standpoint. It addresses questions such as: How many distinct thresholds or cutoffs on a scale (i.e., what levels of granularity) are useful for a rational agent? Where should these thresholds be placed given a rational agent’s preferences and risk-orientation? Do scale score assignments have any bearing on decision-making and if so, how should scores be assigned? Given two possible states of nature , an ordered collection of alternatives from which one is to be selected depending on the probability that A is the case, a simple expected utility condition stipulates when adjacent alternatives are distinguishable and determines the threshold odds separating them. Threshold odds and utilities are mapped onto scale scores via a simple distance model. The placement of the thresholds reflects relative concern over decisional consequences given A versus consequences given ∼ A. Likewise, it is shown that scale scores reflect risk-aversion or risk-seeking not only with respect to A versus ∼ A but also with respect to the rank of the R j . Connections are drawn between this framework and rank-dependent expected utility (RDEU) theory. Implications are adumbrated for both machine and human decision-making.
|Keywords||Measurement Expected utility Scale construction Granularity Decision Uncertainty|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Common Knowledge Revisited.Ronald Fagin, Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses & Moshe Y. Vardi - 1999 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 96 (1-3):89-105.
Citations of this work BETA
How Many Alternatives? Partitions Pose Problems for Predictions and Diagnoses.Michael Smithson - 2009 - Social Epistemology 23 (3):347-360.
Similar books and articles
Expected Utility and Risk.Paul Weirich - 1986 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (4):419-442.
An Experiment on Rational Insurance Decisions.Richard Watt, Francisco J. Vázquez & Ignacio Moreno - 2001 - Theory and Decision 51 (2/4):247-296.
How Ethical Are Purchasing Management Professionals?Robert Landeros & Richard E. Plank - 1996 - Journal of Business Ethics 15 (7):789 - 803.
Developing a Multidimensional Scale for Ethical Decision Making.Gian Luca Casali - 2011 - Journal of Business Ethics 104 (4):485-497.
The Revised Transliminality Scale: Reliability and Validity Data From a Rasch Top-Down Purification Procedure.R. Lange, M. A. Thalbourne, J. Houran & L. Storm - 2000 - Consciousness and Cognition 9 (4):591-617.
Managing the Risk of Non Performing Assets in the Small Scale Industries in India.Rituparna Das - unknown
Positivity of Bid-Ask Spreads and Symmetrical Monotone Risk Aversion.Moez Abouda & Alain Chateauneuf - 2002 - Theory and Decision 52 (2):149-170.
Female Managers' Ethical Decision-Making: A Multidimensional Approach. [REVIEW]Johanna Kujala & Tarja Pietiläinen - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1-2):153-163.
Nondegenerate Intervals of No-Trade Prices for Risk Averse Traders.Gerd Weinrich - 1999 - Theory and Decision 46 (1):79-99.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #270,400 of 2,168,639 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #346,816 of 2,168,639 )
How can I increase my downloads?