The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Coherence and correspondence in engineering design: Informing the conversation and connecting with judgment and decision-making research

Coherence and correspondence in engineering design: Informing the conversation and connecting with judgment and decision-making research
Coherence and correspondence in engineering design: Informing the conversation and connecting with judgment and decision-making research

I show how the coherence/correspondence distinction can inform the conversation about decision methods for engineering design. Some engineers argue for the application of multi-attribute utility theory while others argue for what they call heuristics. To clarify the differences among methods, I first ask whether each method aims at achieving coherence or correspondence. By analyzing statements in the design literature, I argue that utility theory aims at achieving coherence and heuristics aim at achieving correspondence. Second, I ask if achieving coherence always implies achieving correspondence. It is important to provide an answer because while in design the objective is correspondence, it is difficult to assess it, and coherence that is easier to assess is used as a surrogate. I argue that coherence does not always imply correspondence in design and that this is also the case in problems studied in judgment and decision-making research. Uncovering the conditions under which coherence implies, or does not imply, correspondence is a topic where engineering design and judgment and decision-making research might connect.

Coherence, Correspondence, Design. engineering, Heuristics, Multi-attribute utility theory, Pugh process
1930-2975
147-153
Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V.
b97c23d9-8b24-4225-8da4-be7ac2a14fba
Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V.
b97c23d9-8b24-4225-8da4-be7ac2a14fba

Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V. (2009) Coherence and correspondence in engineering design: Informing the conversation and connecting with judgment and decision-making research. Judgment and Decision Making, 4 (2), 147-153.

Record type: Article

Abstract

I show how the coherence/correspondence distinction can inform the conversation about decision methods for engineering design. Some engineers argue for the application of multi-attribute utility theory while others argue for what they call heuristics. To clarify the differences among methods, I first ask whether each method aims at achieving coherence or correspondence. By analyzing statements in the design literature, I argue that utility theory aims at achieving coherence and heuristics aim at achieving correspondence. Second, I ask if achieving coherence always implies achieving correspondence. It is important to provide an answer because while in design the objective is correspondence, it is difficult to assess it, and coherence that is easier to assess is used as a surrogate. I argue that coherence does not always imply correspondence in design and that this is also the case in problems studied in judgment and decision-making research. Uncovering the conditions under which coherence implies, or does not imply, correspondence is a topic where engineering design and judgment and decision-making research might connect.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: 1 March 2009
Keywords: Coherence, Correspondence, Design. engineering, Heuristics, Multi-attribute utility theory, Pugh process

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 439460
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/439460
ISSN: 1930-2975
PURE UUID: f3a83fe9-3238-45c1-be0f-d65013eda2a7
ORCID for Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9572-1980

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Apr 2020 16:54
Last modified: 24 Apr 2020 00:39

Export record

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×