A comparison of encoding techniques

Daniel G. Brooks, Timothy J. O'Leary

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A limiting constraint of many management science techniques is that inputs from the decision maker based upon his experiences, opinions and intuition are not considered. For those models that do allow this type of input, it is assumed that they can be accurately and precisely defined in a subjective probability distribution. Little attention, however, has been directed towards evaluating the techniques to define these distributions in a management setting. This study investigates the relative merits of four of the most commonly used techniques for the quantification of subjective assessments. When these techniques were used with professionals whose jobs entail evaluation of uncertainty, a clear preference was shown. Additionally, some concluding observations concerning the selection and the application of assessment techniques are presented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)49-55
Number of pages7
JournalOmega
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1983

Fingerprint

Decision maker
Job evaluation
Subjective probability
Quantification
Probability distribution
Uncertainty
Management science
Intuition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Strategy and Management
  • Information Systems and Management
  • Management Science and Operations Research

Cite this

Brooks, D. G., & O'Leary, T. J. (1983). A comparison of encoding techniques. Omega, 11(1), 49-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(83)90083-X

A comparison of encoding techniques. / Brooks, Daniel G.; O'Leary, Timothy J.

In: Omega, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1983, p. 49-55.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Brooks, DG & O'Leary, TJ 1983, 'A comparison of encoding techniques', Omega, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 49-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(83)90083-X
Brooks, Daniel G. ; O'Leary, Timothy J. / A comparison of encoding techniques. In: Omega. 1983 ; Vol. 11, No. 1. pp. 49-55.
@article{e62531d45b3c4515aa62b2a2c1ca46f5,
title = "A comparison of encoding techniques",
abstract = "A limiting constraint of many management science techniques is that inputs from the decision maker based upon his experiences, opinions and intuition are not considered. For those models that do allow this type of input, it is assumed that they can be accurately and precisely defined in a subjective probability distribution. Little attention, however, has been directed towards evaluating the techniques to define these distributions in a management setting. This study investigates the relative merits of four of the most commonly used techniques for the quantification of subjective assessments. When these techniques were used with professionals whose jobs entail evaluation of uncertainty, a clear preference was shown. Additionally, some concluding observations concerning the selection and the application of assessment techniques are presented.",
author = "Brooks, {Daniel G.} and O'Leary, {Timothy J.}",
year = "1983",
doi = "10.1016/0305-0483(83)90083-X",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "49--55",
journal = "Omega (United States)",
issn = "0030-2228",
publisher = "Baywood Publishing Co. Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of encoding techniques

AU - Brooks, Daniel G.

AU - O'Leary, Timothy J.

PY - 1983

Y1 - 1983

N2 - A limiting constraint of many management science techniques is that inputs from the decision maker based upon his experiences, opinions and intuition are not considered. For those models that do allow this type of input, it is assumed that they can be accurately and precisely defined in a subjective probability distribution. Little attention, however, has been directed towards evaluating the techniques to define these distributions in a management setting. This study investigates the relative merits of four of the most commonly used techniques for the quantification of subjective assessments. When these techniques were used with professionals whose jobs entail evaluation of uncertainty, a clear preference was shown. Additionally, some concluding observations concerning the selection and the application of assessment techniques are presented.

AB - A limiting constraint of many management science techniques is that inputs from the decision maker based upon his experiences, opinions and intuition are not considered. For those models that do allow this type of input, it is assumed that they can be accurately and precisely defined in a subjective probability distribution. Little attention, however, has been directed towards evaluating the techniques to define these distributions in a management setting. This study investigates the relative merits of four of the most commonly used techniques for the quantification of subjective assessments. When these techniques were used with professionals whose jobs entail evaluation of uncertainty, a clear preference was shown. Additionally, some concluding observations concerning the selection and the application of assessment techniques are presented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0020647726&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0020647726&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0305-0483(83)90083-X

DO - 10.1016/0305-0483(83)90083-X

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0020647726

VL - 11

SP - 49

EP - 55

JO - Omega (United States)

JF - Omega (United States)

SN - 0030-2228

IS - 1

ER -