JUDGING RELATIVE IMPORTANCE - DIRECT RATING AND POINT ALLOCATION ARE NOT EQUIVALENT

In this series of experiments we investigate two commonly used methods of assigning numerical values (i.e., decision weights) to attributes in order to signify their perceived relative importance. The two metho ds are to ask people to directly rate each of the attributes in turn ( Rating), or to allocate a budget of points (typically 100 points) to t he attributes (Point Allocation or PA). These procedures may seem to b e minor variants of one another, yet they produce very different profi les of decision weights. The differences are predicted by a simple, id ealized model of weighting, from which Rating and PA, in different way s, exhibit consistent elicitation-dependent bias. (C) 1997 Academic Pr ess.