Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Behavioral Operational Research pp 119–139Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Insights from an Initial Exploration of Cognitive Biases in Spatial Decisions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 892 Accesses

Abstract

The need and interest to consider cognitive and motivational biases has been recognized in many different disciplines (e.g. economics, operational research, decision theory, finance) and has recently reached environmental decision-making. Within this domain, the intrinsic presence of a spatial dimension of both alternatives and criteria calls for the use of geographical maps throughout the decision-making process to properly represent the spatial distribution of the features under analysis. This makes Spatial Multi Criteria Decision Aiding (SMCDA) a particularly interesting domain to explore new implications of cognitive and motivational biases. The present chapter presents and discusses the results of a literature review of recent applications of Spatial Multi Criteria Decision Aiding across different domains. The objective of the study is to enlighten possible biases in both the design of spatial MCDA models and in the interpretation of their results. The proposed review and classification of the relevant literature is expected to have important implications for spatial decision-making procedures, by generating better awareness on (i) the meta-choices available to model builders when designing Spatial Multi Criteria Decision Aiding processes and (ii) the consequences of these meta-choices on human judgment for both the facilitators of the modeling processes and the users of the models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akin, M. K., Topal, T., & Kramer, S. L. (2013). A newly developed seismic microzonation model of Erbaa (Tokat, Turkey) located on seismically active eastern segment of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ). Natural Hazards, 65(3), 1411–1442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagdanavičiute, I., & Valiunas, J. (2013). GIS-based land suitability analysis integrating multi-criteria evaluation for the allocation of potential pollution sources. Environmental Earth Sciences, 68(6), 1797–1812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagheri, M., Sulaiman, W. N. A., & Vaghefi, N. (2013). Application of geographic information system technique and analytical hierarchy process model for land-use suitability analysis on coastal area. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 17(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cova, T. J., & Church, R. (2000). Exploratory spatial optimization in site search: A neighborhood operator approach. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 24(5), 401–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dragićević, S., Lai, T., & Balram, S. (2014). GIS-based multicriteria evaluation with multiscale analysis to characterize urban landslide susceptibility in data-scarce environments. Habitat International, 45, 114–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esquivel, J. M., Morales, G. P., & Esteller, M. V. (2015). Groundwater monitoring network design using GIS and multicriteria analysis. Water Resources Management, 29(9), 3175–3194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, V. (2013). Spatial multicriteria evaluation to support planning and evaluation procedures: A survey and classification of the literature. Geoingegneria Ambientale e Mineraria, 139(2), 53–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, V., & Gandino, E. (2018). Co-designing the solution space for rural regeneration in a new World Heritage site: A choice experiments approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 1077–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, V., & Montibeller, G. (2016). Key challenges and meta-choices in designing and applying multi-criteria spatial decision support systems. Decision Support Systems, 84, 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gdoura, K., Anane, M., & Jellali, S. (2015). Geospatial and AHP-multicriteria analyses to locate and rank suitable sites for groundwater recharge with reclaimed water. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 104, 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P. (2015). Behavioural issues in environmental modelling—The missing perspective. Environmental Modelling and Software, 73, 244–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., & Alaja, S. (2008). The threat of weighting biases in environmental decision analysis. Ecological Economics, 68(1), 556–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamzeh, M., Abbaspour, A. R., & Davalou, R. (2015). Raster-based outranking method: A new approach for municipal solid waste landfill (MSW) siting. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22(16), 12511–12524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, I. V., Keisler, J., & Linkov, I. (2011). Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Ten years of applications and trends. Science of the Total Environment, 409, 3578–3594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobi, S. K., & Hobbs, B. F. (2007). Quantifying and mitigating the splitting bias and other value tree-induced weighting biases. Decision Analysis, 4(4), 194–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, B. (2013). Head/tail breaks: A new classification scheme for data with a heavy-tailed distribution. The Professional Geographer, 65(3), 482–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, J., Kim, C., Jayakumar, S., Kim, S., Han, S., Kim, D. H., et al. (2013). Forest fire risk mapping of Kolli Hills, India, considering subjectivity and inconsistency issues. Natural Hazards, 65(3), 2129–2146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Gregory, R. S. (2005). Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Operations Research, 53(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunc, M., Malpass, J., & White, L. (2016). Behavioral Operational Research: Theory, Methodology and Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J. (2004). GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: A critical overview. Progress in Planning, 62(1), 3–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J. (2006). GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: A survey of the literature. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20(7), 703–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malczewski, J., & Rinner, C. (2015). Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Geographic Information Science. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Malekmohammadi, B., & Rahimi Blouchi, L. (2014). Ecological risk assessment of wetland ecosystems using multi criteria decision making and geographic information system. Ecological Indicators, 41, 134–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marttunen, M., Belton, V., & Lienert, J. (2018). Are objectives hierarchy related biases observed in practice? A meta-analysis of environmental and energy applications of multi-criteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 265, 178–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mighty, M. A. (2015). Site suitability and the analytic hierarchy process: How GIS analysis can improve the competitive advantage of the Jamaican coffee industry. Applied Geography, 58, 84–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monmonier, M. (1991). How to Lie with Maps. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monmonier, M. (1993). Mapping It Out: Expository Cartography for the Humanities and Social Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, A., & Fasolo, B. (2009). Behavioural decision theory for multi-criteria decision analysis: A guided tour. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60, 268–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romano, G., Dal Sasso, P., Trisorio Liuzzi, G., & Gentile, F. (2015). Multi-criteria decision analysis for land suitability mapping in a rural area of Southern Italy. Land Use Policy, 48, 131–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L., & Ozdemir, M. S. (2003). Why the magic number seven plus or minus two. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 38(3), 233–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J., Kirkwood, C. W., & Keller, L. R. (2014). Decision analysis with geographically varying outcomes: Preference models and illustrative applications. Operations Research, 62(1), 182–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Winterfeldt, D., & Edwards, W. (1986). Decision Analysis and Behavioural Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanderer, T., & Herle, S. (2015). Creating a spatial multi-criteria decision support system for energy related integrated environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 52, 2–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. E. (1987). Selling a geographical information system to government policy makers. URISA, 3, 150–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yal, G. P., & Akgün, H. (2013). Landfill site selection and landfill liner design for Ankara, Turkey. Environmental Earth Sciences, 70(6), 2729–2752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Daniel Pfaller for his support in reviewing the relevant literature.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy

    Valentina Ferretti

  2. Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

    Valentina Ferretti

Authors
  1. Valentina Ferretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valentina Ferretti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

    Leroy White

  2. Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

    Martin Kunc

  3. School of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    Katharina Burger

  4. Applied Research, BT, Martlesham Heath, UK

    Jonathan Malpass

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ferretti, V. (2020). Insights from an Initial Exploration of Cognitive Biases in Spatial Decisions. In: White, L., Kunc, M., Burger, K., Malpass, J. (eds) Behavioral Operational Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25405-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation