In Top-Down Decisions, Weighting Variables does Not Matter: A Consequence of Wilks' Theorem

Type: Article

Publication Date: 1998-10-01

Citations: 48

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819814003

Abstract

It is often appropriate to weight variables to form a composite for making decisions. Examples include selection systems, organizational performance criteria, test items, and decision modeling. Frequently, criterion-based regression-weighting is employed, but a sizable literature argues for unit or simple weighting. Wainer demonstrated small loss from equal weights compared to regression weights. Usually, weights are of little importance for rank ordering, echoing Wainer's "it don't make no nevermind." Wilks proved a general theorem, that under common circumstances, almost all weighted composites of a set of variables are highly correlated. That is, if a single set of variables is weighted two different ways to form two composites, the expected correlation for the two composites is very high. The authors demonstrate the effect of Wilks' theorem through illustrative examples. Implications of Wilks' theorem are discussed. When top-down decisions are made, weighting variables does not matter because the rank ordering remains almost constant.

Locations

  • Organizational Research Methods - View
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) - View - PDF

Similar Works

Action Title Year Authors
+ Prioritization and decision-making: A brief review of methods 2023 Stan Lipovetsky
+ PDF Chat Towards Explainable Topsis: Visual Insights into the Effects of Weights and Aggregations on Rankings 2023 Robert Susmaga
Izabela Szczęch
Dariusz Brzeziński
+ Towards Explainable TOPSIS: Visual Insights into the Effects of Weights and Aggregations on Rankings 2023 Robert Susmaga
Izabela Szczęch
Dariusz Brzeziński
+ Task oriented weighting in multi-criteria analysis 1999 Chung‐Hsing Yeh
Robert J. Willis
Hepu Deng
Hongqi Pan
+ Simple additive weighting—A metamodel for multiple criteria decision analysis methods 2016 Ignacy Kaliszewski
Dmitry Podkopaev
+ PDF Chat TOPSIS-based Regression Algorithms Evaluation 2022 Ahmad Adel Abu-Shareha
+ Characterizing disagreement and inconsistency in experts' judgments in the analytic hierarchy process 2012 Shi‐Woei Lin
Ming‐Tsang Lu
+ Unit weighting schemes for decision making 1975 Hillel J. Einhorn
Robin M. Hogarth
+ PDF Chat Predictor Analysis in Group Decision Making 2021 Stan Lipovetsky
+ Estimation and Decision Theory 2024 Carlos Polanco
+ Data Analysis & Decision Making with Microsoft Excel- Text Only 2006 S. Christian Albright
Wayne L. Winston
Christopher Zappe
+ PDF Chat A Modified CRITIC Method to Estimate the Objective Weights of Decision Criteria 2021 Anath Rau Krishnan
Maznah Mat Kasim
Hamid Rizal
Mohd Fahmi Ghazali
+ Predictive and simultaneous weighting of criteria and alternatives (PSWCA) in multi-criteria decision making based on past data 2024 Arash Pazhouhandeh
Parvaneh Samouei
+ Relative importance of predictors: Comparison of Random Forests with Johnson's Relative Weights 2010 Dimitri Liakhovitski
Yegor Bryukhov
Michael Conklin
+ A predictive-validity-based procedure for choosing between regression and equal weights 1978 Philippe C. Cattin
+ Review of Literature on Decision Making and Survey Techniques 2017 Subhi Abdullah Al-Mutawa
+ Notice of Retraction: A unique approach to multi-factor decision making by combining hierarchical analysis with error analysis 2010 Soleyman Iranzadeh
Farzam Chakherlouy
+ Some Comments on Pareto Thinking, Test Validity, and Adverse Impact: When ‘and’ is optimal and ‘or’ is a trade‐off 2008 Denise Potosky
Philip Bobko
Philip L. Roth
+ Decision Theory 2009 Giovanni Parmigiani
Lurdes Y. T. Inoue
Hedibert F. Lopes
+ Statistical Decision-Making 2021 Michael F. Insana