Digital Simulation of Option-Choice Behaviour

Ray Wyatt, Jim Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

After suggesting why environmental planning seems reluctant to do so, this paper presents a testable hypothesis about how people make planning decisions. Our hypothesis is that no matter what planning problem people address, they always use a common set of criteria in order to evaluate alternative options. Also, the priorities that they place on these criteria remain fairly constant, both through time and across problem domain. We then describe some software that makes our hypothesis operational, and we report on an experiment that used our software to test whether or not our hypothesis is valid. Despite the small samples of people involved, nothing was found to suggest that our hypothesis is false, and so it appears to have considerable potential — subject, of course, to more rigorous testing in the future. Moreover, it has utility right now, as explained in the final section. This describes how our software improved the quality of decisions within a practical, case study, planning situation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)331-354
Number of pages24
JournalUrban Systems
Volume24
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Planning
Testing
Experiments

Cite this

Wyatt, Ray ; Smith, Jim. / Digital Simulation of Option-Choice Behaviour. In: Urban Systems. 2000 ; Vol. 24, No. 4. pp. 331-354.
@article{de7b8cdad34b447590436eaf78c5b0b9,
title = "Digital Simulation of Option-Choice Behaviour",
abstract = "After suggesting why environmental planning seems reluctant to do so, this paper presents a testable hypothesis about how people make planning decisions. Our hypothesis is that no matter what planning problem people address, they always use a common set of criteria in order to evaluate alternative options. Also, the priorities that they place on these criteria remain fairly constant, both through time and across problem domain. We then describe some software that makes our hypothesis operational, and we report on an experiment that used our software to test whether or not our hypothesis is valid. Despite the small samples of people involved, nothing was found to suggest that our hypothesis is false, and so it appears to have considerable potential — subject, of course, to more rigorous testing in the future. Moreover, it has utility right now, as explained in the final section. This describes how our software improved the quality of decisions within a practical, case study, planning situation.",
author = "Ray Wyatt and Jim Smith",
year = "2000",
doi = "10.1016/S0198-9715(99)00050-2",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "331--354",
journal = "Urban Systems",
issn = "0198-9715",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "4",

}

Digital Simulation of Option-Choice Behaviour. / Wyatt, Ray; Smith, Jim.

In: Urban Systems, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2000, p. 331-354.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Digital Simulation of Option-Choice Behaviour

AU - Wyatt, Ray

AU - Smith, Jim

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - After suggesting why environmental planning seems reluctant to do so, this paper presents a testable hypothesis about how people make planning decisions. Our hypothesis is that no matter what planning problem people address, they always use a common set of criteria in order to evaluate alternative options. Also, the priorities that they place on these criteria remain fairly constant, both through time and across problem domain. We then describe some software that makes our hypothesis operational, and we report on an experiment that used our software to test whether or not our hypothesis is valid. Despite the small samples of people involved, nothing was found to suggest that our hypothesis is false, and so it appears to have considerable potential — subject, of course, to more rigorous testing in the future. Moreover, it has utility right now, as explained in the final section. This describes how our software improved the quality of decisions within a practical, case study, planning situation.

AB - After suggesting why environmental planning seems reluctant to do so, this paper presents a testable hypothesis about how people make planning decisions. Our hypothesis is that no matter what planning problem people address, they always use a common set of criteria in order to evaluate alternative options. Also, the priorities that they place on these criteria remain fairly constant, both through time and across problem domain. We then describe some software that makes our hypothesis operational, and we report on an experiment that used our software to test whether or not our hypothesis is valid. Despite the small samples of people involved, nothing was found to suggest that our hypothesis is false, and so it appears to have considerable potential — subject, of course, to more rigorous testing in the future. Moreover, it has utility right now, as explained in the final section. This describes how our software improved the quality of decisions within a practical, case study, planning situation.

U2 - 10.1016/S0198-9715(99)00050-2

DO - 10.1016/S0198-9715(99)00050-2

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 331

EP - 354

JO - Urban Systems

JF - Urban Systems

SN - 0198-9715

IS - 4

ER -