Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Decision Rules and A Search For A Dominance Structure

    Uploaded by

    Elizabeth Strait
    38 views27 pages

    Original Title

    Decision Rules and a Search for a Dominance Structure

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    38 views27 pages

    Decision Rules and A Search For A Dominance Structure

    Uploaded by

    Elizabeth Strait

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 27
    DECISION RULES AND THE SEARCH FOR A DOMINANCE STRUCTURE: TOWARDS A PROCESS MODEL OF DECISION MAKING* Henry MONTGOMERY Deprmer of Pcl, Unbersy of Geer Sten Abatnet A ninber of obemastacal ih poncompenstr and comgenatny eon ‘Ai ccuen i ppd tat the poles ould be raed the openers et such for Somme src. att # SOBs Sct ech ae she stenae canbe ena dein ore oh. moe was insped by an es that deckon making is seach for iguments As pointed vt by see eeashes, people wis tobe to iy thet decisions that ohare easly understandable esors they act as they do (eg, Sloe, 1975; Twerky, 1972). They also 1 terion for knowing when they ae teay fr 1 decison. Believe 1 Gran in often preceded by a eck” experience,» feeling of ‘now [brow wht todo, This “elck” experience meres when enon maker fede argument that are strong enough for making ‘Nanesous decison ss have been suggest for how peogle choose ultattbutelteratves fora review, se Swenson, 1979) Below arte that one these rls is more fodamentl than the other in ly was ancl by 2 gt rom te Swath Coun for Reva te "0d spn Senses Tom nbd to anes En, PetBan EE Sd Oe ron fer coat on csr eon the PPE te decison ake’ seach for good arguments Thi rl i the dominance ‘ale, which states that one should always choose an alternative wich i ‘mt were than other alteratives on any attibute and beter oma leat ‘ve attribute. The dominance rl ea coetstone in theories of rational Aecision making (eg, Edwards taf, 1966). The problem with thi rue tat in most desson situations, we do not find an alternative whch suit speaking, dominates ove all other alternatives Wha wl he Gost son maker do in sich situation? It sassumedhetin tat he or she wil sttempt to ceate dominance by chaagog his or hes representation ofthe ‘cision situation such that one aRernative becomes dorian Put if erly, the deision pres is eens arch fora dominance tin. To create sch a structure, the decison maker could change hiseation ‘orcountealanced in one way or another “Thee ate two point which should be lea igh rom the bea ‘eqrding the dominance sctue concep, as it Used tn thi pe Fin, a dominance structure could be more or let close to pute ‘nce. The more disadvantages ofthe chosen alternative tat hae 1 sevralzed or counterbalanced the pester the ditance to pre tues. Second, a dominance stricture may seflet varying ratonalityiationalty in the deaion proces Ati own blow, sare mary_ways of comtruing 2 dominance structure. Some of” Below, I petent a tentative mode for decison proces th seach fra dominance structure. This search ir asimed to be co ith using aious deco ules besides the dorance le, More the other dion rules are assed to serve local functions i ‘aision process by serving a operators in the search for ‘nicture. For example, oe rule may be ued for excluding 2 iterative which fas 's low probably to become dominant scther rule may be wed for nestralzing# diadvantage of ternative. The decison rules refered toi the folowing discasion ae ‘he Table. Al rules presuppose that Jeon tution const of of choice alates which can be described in terms of etned dimensions or atiuies (ct. Montgomery and Season, The atibuts ay be on any metre level ranging from pe Example o Dion te as Dimncinee | ors Biminaton by | aa ester tects Aircore ie Cac stent yore Ay Ay iter {han Ay ont lene tate a ot ‘in A Seats ‘tes one tat {or signiteanty bette than Ay on the mot ort sete fh repens hm Ite ee he che nt mow tne ‘pone 5 stem rite (hoot A art Ay Ayia fA ona mani of a fore om A ame (Coo he aerate nthe peste ‘ttweghe) sane ve tin) ‘As "Bierce Dy = fare 0 whee ‘Seite snctnents of oper Se aher ivchaa arte and cots “ete pont, chose A an fit ‘soemtve chore Ay 1 The coke of mqutanent A aot fy al se weil see be eee a more le ‘of puticuar entre (eg, ate tubjno bathtub in Mts) to rato scale menus (eg, space in sn of fits). The values on each attbute ace tefered to a8 epee (eg, the particular se of x home on the atbte Sie of homes). Each aspect is tamed te experienced more or leat sate by the deison maker Hence, iis proposed that the sopects Could b mapped on an atractivenent sil. The sale i pei foreach snus and the values on the scale need not be commensuble soe sterbute Tie rules in the Table include fve noncompenstory roles (de ‘DOM, CON, DIS, LEX, and EBA rus) and tre compensatory rules (| MNA, AU, and AUD rues). The non compensatory rules do not allow that 1 unatzacive apect on one atirbute fe compenstad by a SSpecton another attsbute (rice yrs). Ia contrat, the rus require that drawbacks and advantages of diferent atabutes fotegeted oa toa attractiveness measure % ‘te important clas of rls ot lnted inthe Table, nal, ich primarily corespond to decisionmaking under risk or Stil, the present framework i annmed to be valid alo for making ander risk or uncertaty. Actually, ia shown later in hia wobsbiitic fates of a deciion situation yield prc po for creating a dominance struct. However, the applicability of rls for decison raking under isk, suchas the EV, BU nd SEU to the pesent framework & in my view, unclear or quetionble, this icause of the curent doubts aast some o ll of these dectpne models of decison making (Fschhol ea, 198K; ry and Adsbatt, 1980; Kahneman and Tversky, 1979) “The remaoder ofthis paper const of five tions Inthe second section I dicas a mumbee of problems sociated with pensatory and compenssory decison rule, respectively. Ia Seaton dtferent phases ofa decision proces te deibed and ‘alos dein fulet In the fourth tection ir shown how oocited with non-compenatory and compensatory rile 60 ‘ldel the role are son ax operators in seach for «dominos tore Im the Ft section, T cis revch don that might be ‘om the pesent frameverk. ‘Probleme with Non Compensatory Roles Mout somcompenstory rales are srobbly easier to apply for ection than the compensatory ones. Ul, they onl requ relationships between attactvenets ales and mot of thea Limited Applicat, iets wise ete aoa. A dco ut competely Tre reccrt f culd be wd fo sect one nd ony oan a cnr tancompeatony rae ted athe Tee es mennad tao destin station Bespin eee ae rae ore a it the DOM rae requir that on stern nate ove ll othe alernatives, The CON and Dis ce wy at Tancompentory res do nt alow dxvbacs ob com mr gta (otis ven) npr nae tat npecens rr abet Prtcty this i the rane gd eat rh ie rales. Conder, for istanc, a hatha whee iit low conjunctive crteton on one atten coe we patton al other ates nd where aothes de aot pat icepable onal attrbutn The CON rae wove nee ‘cholo the second alto, butt seemstenonble ae ‘not situations of his type people wool! peer the fist altematve. That 4 oce would arg thatthe fact thatthe fst alternative is below the ‘Snjmetve citron on one atibute x compeasited by all the admntages this ernative has on oer atirdutes compared tothe second aleratv Recently, Einhoun el (1979) prseted numberof argumentfor the neces of making compensatory judgements in some stators. Probleme wth Compensatory Ras Compensatory res can, at last theoretical, be used in all stations ‘Ununty, thy allow te decison maker Co conser alinforation whic tein for his decsion. There are, however, at last four bb ‘Souated with compenstoy cues: They are) compensatory uss tequte too complet value Judgements (0) it may be dificl have ned overview of arguments bard on compensatory rules; () the. uactvenss measures anmocntl with compensatory rues may be ‘Snes ab to abc; (2) compensatory rules empusize that one ha {ve up cevtale good things to get other goed things and people ate thowat of ving upanything. : Complete of Value Judgements [A triton view of « decon sation is hat each cote ales ‘nay be deveied laters of tvo component, camel, 8) the ‘em (or uty) of powsble consequence of the alternative (Ly nd, (9) the robablity of ech consequence Hence, the conse Tepe as uncertain but not the atvactitenes In reality, ore ae often uncttain about how to erate the aspect in ‘tation (cf: Fach ra, 1981), There re several reasons fr Specs may be new t0 the decision maker and, therefore, ‘Sehate They nay cowreepond to fate events which impli Scion mar ray baveo predic his emotional reactions t thee ‘mr onder to be able fo eluate them. Needless tos, the maybe uncer. There is sho the wellknown problem of totvenes of events in the tear and distant tue, Finaly, it may be dificult to compre the attactivenest of conreponding to sany evens (eg the total discomfort of Seaton each carr) tothe atracienes of singe evet | bing hurt ina caraclden) c a—_— ‘The fact that we have diculties in emaatng the aspects of ‘ksion station cannot fe us fom the butdenof making thes eval, tens ticles, however, that compenstery roles tequie more complet ‘alue judgements than nom compensatory roles do, That i they tere ‘comparisons of atactivenes values aot diferent atibues whereas he nvcompenstory cles oly require compsons within an atrbute The former tye of value jadgements maybe dificult to make exemplified stove. By contrast, people usally hav no problems in otperng pects wii anatrbute atleast on a ordinal level. Ths because the gneal iwcton of the atactnenes fonction for paticlrattbut ely tear to people, To pay much money i wally wore than payg litle smeney, A big Mtiuualy better ana srl an soon. ‘Ths Oversew Problem ‘Tobe abe to justly decison itis important to have & good overview of the arguments for and against diferent choke alternatives That ‘suld be posable keep at muchas possible ofthe arprnents within the limts of the decison makers short-term memory, Compensatory rales at they ate described in the lterture, uly do not contain any tts fon the amount of lnermation tat sbsld be taken into ecount by the ection make. Hence, choices based on thee rule ay be dificult {stdy when the decison stution contains «larger number of espe. ‘Norsompessstory rls, onthe other hand, end fo osu on one or few trbutes and may, hence, led to decions which are easy tous, For ample, in order to choose an akeratve according tothe june 8 overall attractiveness mesures sociated wth compensatory rls tell ey tle about the underlying pattern of atractvenets aves: There thee messes may be regarded ax ait Non compensatory ‘ues She other hand, are based on mote concrete formation se they that the chosen alternative shoud exhibit a certain path of vals in ration tothe other skersatves They coq for that the chorenaltematiwe should have at east one alvenage Alaaotages in eation to other ateratives (DOM rule) or tat ‘be the only atertive with scceptble aspects onal tributes (CON sale). If people experience the compensatory rues 2 10 aback, they may peter noncompenaton rls even in stutions with smal number ofattiutes and with well defined aspects, That people Indeed nny polar aonompenatory rues in such situations as been fsnd ina hunter of expements (eg, Lichtenstein, Sloe, nd Zink, 1969; Mont [omey, 1977; Montgomery’ and Abelrat, 1980; Tors, 1969, 1972). ‘The Giving up robe Sine: compensatory cles roqice tideolf judgements acros die iste they emplaize the gael fic that we sometimes hve tg Sp smthing in order to get something else Tt sems cleat tat people fot lke sic confcts an that they tend to experience the word mc {hat they aid sesing thee conte (Psi, 1987, 1964 ‘nd MeFadden, 1980; ober, 1981; Jans and Man, 1977). Of Simrly hate to art that dey ha to give up something to gt sm Cle, This may lead to distorted world ews or what Sjoberg (198) cl "frown ates" However, ain shown below, there are ways of eu the pin of giving up something witout losing contact with ay. = ‘Phases ina Decon Process We hae now discubed problems with both non-compensitory and entry rus However, odious that both ype of rales hae ocholoical reality. Difecent types of dt, such as thinkalod ‘Ootgomery, 1977; Payne, 1976 Senso; 1974) choice data 196, 1972) jadgrent data (Einhorn, 1970, 1971), and ratings tppleabity of warou decion rues (Adebat and Montgo ‘fserate convincingly the descriptive and predictive validity ‘econ cles. Sil | beleve dat all decision rls, except fot tule (im most cases) ae ot pure decison rls in the ere tha thecve are efficent for determing whether» particular & Inte is chosen or aot. send they correspond to operations ‘th, ore alan of nel functions ina decison proces. To ‘rh may He behind varour decison rie, wil no isting our plas decion proces The ae reading finding 4 Poe Altemative, dominance tevting ad dominance structuring, AOU lvoe search for and eration of information Ia terms attiutes apd alternatives ach pase asoeated with 3 Ut the detson maker ha to attain In order to, constrict x dominance structure. The gon are asocted with vous ‘opeations corresponding to certain patterns of search for information nd cvalation of information. These operations are often lowly related 10 ‘tala decision rules The Figure gies an overview of how a decison proces may b crane in tees ofthe present framework. Ascan be sen, the dein woces i viewed as folowing 2 flowciurt. Tis format should not be taken to litealy, however. In realty thee tay be fuzzy border ins Ga = on I ‘Sh 8 Te Pea I ering co Seu) Mode of Deon Mig, Ch xpress within pete, EB, san fo decon mis sue o mymied a ne pee) Py Monnet eeweea the acts dsrbed inthe model Moreover, the apt been th etnies the model ot stretydtermine a8 cei eater to stot tendencies which eed ro Beeler ia fare epi reear ci ces i deed inthe Pigue siad 1 art ith the pce hooang one ou of eee armas age ath bt as aren sou the ee of He mpm sow te rn he dfn of te posem once Has aren, # a ‘patent part of the model athe Fite act pr of ye deen te of oak tat ae ssc ‘yah coh Sen making pase. The goa ofthe peeing He, AR i eh our piariy i he bepnig of te deciion Pen 3 see a he ern geben by seeing om etn an nest find an akerntive hat haa eto hanes 8 aerate pn then neue sch wlan scan Fe ontinges ting whether the romney alee {ecto JO domiant util al aformaton secre ne %e eiae bern lune. I, onthe other Hand, dommes ase pe jaiton maker nay earn tothe pedigree fe ee pase al turn eden he eon ONS {og aera orising alternate. Alternatively, the deston [Postpone the decision, thi i poss mt Te dics each ofthe fou deion making Pate etait preesiine te rnin gon of this plas can be described 38 separting To en Tes rcevart information whch can Be Imtt neeaton ocesig. The actin th hw a Decision nus ws ‘inc distinctions which could be used for setting up prt for how the Infrmaton willbe handled in subsequent decison making pases. This phise is called preediing to stress tht the atti ia this phase provide the basis fr srequent operations but alo to ding them from the eiting oe sructring operations which re peformed in {he domanance structing piss Recently, Kahaetan and Tyerky (1979) argued forthe exstence of an eiting phase in Jecsion making. As ithe cate with pedi inthe [etent model, the goal of Kahneman and Tvesky’s eiting phase i 10 ‘oncentmate the representation of + delion station into Ks os eer tl features However, the editing operations desrbed by Kehneman sad ‘Tveiky ate more sia to some ofthe dominance strturing operons Aescsbed below than to preeiting inthe present model. (Note though, ‘at Kahneman and Tersky donot assume that thet editing operations te istrumental fo the ndig of dominance srotare) The operations inthe pee-edting phase are of two types, vi select: Ingand erasing atiruts, and screening of aleraies ‘Selecting and evobating atrbutes Several proces tracing ties have found that deiion makers evaluate the importance of abuts in ‘thee representation of the choice situation Huber, 1980; Payne ,1976;Sren- *) ton, 1978) It might be assumed that the function of thee eralations strbutes from futher consideration for all or some atertines Johnsen and Ruse, 1981; Payne, 1976). Tat there indeed a ele ‘tween judged importance ofan atbute and is aca po. nthe decison proces, has bea shown by lon (1975) and Huber 980) However, there ate alo other factors than judged importance might affect the extent to which an atubute plays role the Process. Sloe and MacPhllamy (1974) found that subjects ed atbutes more hevly when they were common to al aera. ‘han when they were unique. Tveraky (1969) reported findings thatthe elabty or diseminabity of ales ona atbute Ay elated tothe attnbute' lence in the deco proces, To the author's knowledge o general decison rl hasbeen offered aking research for how people find or tlctinpotant tet. On the other hand, some deton rales, sich a the EBA and Tiles, andthe AU and AUD rules (with weighting), arebaed othe th attibutes vary in importance and that he ayporance determines of partir attributes n subsequent information proses Screening. This operation isthe counterpart ofthe selecting sterbtes operation with regard to the aeratives in + chance situation. However, the seening operation is astumed to fneton more {in elter or faslon laamoch a8 focused on either finding seceptble ‘or intresting altratvs or on dicrding o eecting noneceptable ot nlneresing alternatives “The tain function of seenng in the present model i t0 alteaties with some chince of becoming dominant or discard tives which have avery small change to be seen a dominant over. alternates, Dicarding a alternative does ot necessary imply that kermatie is totaly sglctd in the following decision oct. On omtay, the decison maker may keep some discarded alteratv in ‘later ages of the decison process to make it ose to chek fone alternative ined dominate, in some sense, over other “This en is ndiecly supported by Tyas (1988) recent finding alternatives which dominate over a particular lterative tend to be fered to other alternatives whch do not dominate over th altering ‘question. Thee results imply that «decion may’ be facatd by {hse (oan alternative which i domizaed by anther lteratve ‘Screening also eet the fact that people Jost donot acept alternatives. Ul, crnin minimm requirements shouldbe ‘hoe alternatives that ae experienced as posse candidates for he clots (Simon, 1958), Sometines, no altematve full soch requirements. The decision maker tay then attempt to fad new tives which may be selected as aoeptable (ef Corbin, 1980). The tive which filly & chose, is always assumed to fave been selected a accopabl by the decison maker. Ifthe screening operation hus resulted in finding at accoplable alteratv, It eods when all wale alternatives ‘hesied or when the tof sceptd alternatives hs reached some sa, The liter ae ils that the peychologial (or economia) Seatching for and conidering new choice alternatives my be of} tance in deldlg when to stop the srenig proces. (Por a rebated problems se Corb, 1980) "The peychologia rely of the sreeing operation is result from everal studies which soggest that at an eal decision process people tend to discard alternatives which for not acceptable om one or Several atbutes ep, Payne, 1976 1974; Wight and Basbour, 1977) Hence, it seems that this Ing of alternates follow the CON or EBA rls. However, the ot conclu enough to exclude that other dein rues tho for dacardng o seting alternatives. For example that doce not pasta CON or an EBA txt may 20 neces bes |AS noted above, people may accept alternatives which do ot seceplable on some atribute i this drawback is compensated by very dative aspects on other atebutes. Thos the weston ofan aceptable siteratve could be asinciatd with compenatry decison ules and par §oulary the AU rue which i focused on comparisons within sn alern. sve. I could als be the case tat people dcr alternatives which are sccepable onal attbutesbutnot particulary atactive on any atuibute. Boch a line of reasoning would mg that people discard alteratves which donot full the requirements of the DIS rl. In conclusion, several decision rules may be asocuted with the screning operon, ‘Edhough the CON and EBA rues seem to be mort slowly slated to this penton. nang Promising Alternative ‘The model in the Figure implies that 2 decion proces I eared a 4 serch fr and tating of hypotheses about which aernative ie eter han the others, or move specially, which isthe alternative that mos ato tally can be seen as dominant oer the otha seems reasonable tht ‘en the decision waker finds a alternative to test with epatd tot ‘uperirity over oter alternatives, he ot she has some bl or hope dat ‘us alternative actualy Better than the other For this reo sich an ‘erative i henceforth denoted as promising ternative. Is assumed tat sa rue oaly oe lense ta ie i tote “yh sourd tots superiority. Benue of thi natral to dstagish Tetween the peesitng hase which remltsinseeralacoptblorinte ting altematives and the present phase in which one of thes alteratives pleted out as promising alternative to test with regard to ts supe ott. However, dependent on the outcome of rubequent decison aking phases, he individual may site rapidly between diferent alter ‘tives wilh he ids promising, one a time. What makes an alternative pomiig? It wes reasonable thet the ore atactive a alteratve om any atibute, the rater ithe chance atthe alternative i experienced as promising. Parteuly this might be eae for important atrbutes (Slot, 1978), Two ofthe decison ue to inthe Table, viz, the DIS and LEX res, ae fowsed on the attractive aspects in dconstuaton an could, bance be wed for 2 promising aterative. "The EDA rule may aso be relevant insofar as consistent wage ofthis imple nding sn aerate that i more attractive on a partic te than other alternatives remaining nr the screening pte. [n the EBA rule provides comebensive procedure for both he cee Ing and the Mading of promising alternative pluses. Hence the fst Mtbute (or attributes) on which the rule applied maybe related tthe Screening phase wheess the final atribute on which the ule apple, that ig a atrbute on which ony one sealing alternate exceeds the criterion (ee Table), maybe reatd tothe finding of «promising alhrratine pie “Tete ae other es bees decison rules which we have to deus, ‘n oxder to explain what makes an ateratie promising. However, thee Isurs are ali reted topeeiing and are dsased in the follwing. section, . Genera Discusion of Pret ad Finding 1 Promising Altematve:Dietonaty 9f Decision Proceses The t4o peeling operations snd the ining of promising may be more o les dependent on each other. For example, screen ‘he Binding of «promising aernative may depend on the sleton ‘valuation of attebutes This i because the tw former process may Sas on aspects on important or salentstbutes, There may li Aependences between seening sn Riding» promising aterrating may depend onthe selection and evaluation of atbutes. Fo ex the finding of ery promising alternative may make it easier to d other ess promising alteratves. Convene, the Binding of an alternative (ereeing) may muke it ewier to experience some ‘ternative a pomsing. I lteresting to note that exetly these Acie could be predicted from Helon’s (1968) adaption level Pardue’ (1965) related ange eguency model “The preliminary pases of + decion proces now lavlve more or les contract tctits, Sometimes alterat tubutes ae presented tothe decion maker na clesrcut ‘a tems of an alternative by atisbutes mats. This i often thee [beratoryexperinent o ‘in of important or salentattabues and of accepable ‘ell as of a roming alteratine may be done in » aer,Le,witha mama of constructive acti. I her the decison maka i confronted with ildefined aleve ‘es which implies that he must ately seach for of lag or acceptable attcbutes and alternative. He may even DecuION RULES 37 onset very unattractive alternatives in order to make it exert accept other lessnateactve alent Proediting andthe finding of « promising aleratve imply thatthe decison proces acquires acutsin dnectonality in the sen tha etn alternatives and attbutes wil texte more attention than other subscuent decison making pases The ditional of the pres ay te determined more o lst consi. Shit inthe dteconity ay osc were tines in the proces, particularly when the dcilon maker fas tofnda dominance tract for 4 promi serative, The force of the dtctonlty may vary ato india asa. ‘ons. By strong directionality 1 mean cases wher te Jetson maker fs hea committed to only one alterative and only attends to aformation which supports that alterative. By cats the dectonalty i wesk when the decision maker attends to both postive and negative evidence sciaed with promising alerative and when he pepe fo arch {ora new promising alternative, ithe nepative evidence asa the creat promising sterativeeto tong, ‘The dretonality may be pricy strong in sess stuns of various kinds nis and Mann, 1977; Sjoberg, 1980, 1981) ot when igh values se af stake. An internal factor tht ay stengthen the dite only is what Sjoberg (1980) called “image” sch a certain expe ces with a strong emotional tng. In general, hen the dectioaiy stro it my be moe inuenced by affective reatons "hot cog ton". Zsjone (1980) recently argued that decsion making, tx els eresces in general, i detcrned by soto affectine reaction, wich In anuned toe finy independent ofthe copnitve processes involved in eeopiing particular object. Support fr thi ide was taken om Sere of experimental rests which lndested that people can celably “serine between new and od objets in terms of lective udgeente (Uk diike ratings) in the total absence of recognition memory (old new judgements). Howevee, pethape in contrast to Zajc, I believe that ther ae decision situations where affective rations play maior role. In these fates diectionaity is rather weak and takes the form ofan pet testing procedure without any strong bis toward or aunt Pail choice alterativs. For earple, the decison maker sould 'o nd a dominance structure foreach «number of aerstves um at finaly choose tha aerate for which doranance ste et ely found, ‘Whether the diectionaity is song or wea, t might be appropiate este the undertying proces in terms of particular cision flex. For regardless of whether the bias toward certain alanatie x HMosteomer song ox wea, his bis might edt tthe fact at the don maker ‘sect by 4 parclraipect ofthat alleratie, which woul Be quer to Belg gull by the DIS leo. etinp he LEX ae. The Steno re conept wold be lft Zjone (1980) costa tes hypothe hat ptreces in geal ate ged by gro, gue, and gobal sinus features. However, Zajone's suport fo ths particle Fypotbess fay Indect and pwimaly esc Yo et Vina $l sch clos and ss J “There ae se tutions, show, bes pefeences mong ols 104 fs, where «Soin in ems of deco res ges an ih ore ew of what ely gig on Often tev eason wy people fet ied Yo choosing. mot choosing prc alee, that ther people sport tse gla the chic of ts erat, ota thre soe norm of cata hab which peseBes or probs the Coc of talent Sic actos may determin th cecton of [Fomiing atest wel he sergh ofthe diction of ‘quent oration proc, Noo Ms other pepe of ‘oul of sour, be defined a pct with aan dae of ‘ose and in ths way be road at equlet Yo other specs in Scuba’ epson f the col station. That i ie ever he arate A hs ay be repels an atc spel {hs aerate andthe fe hat aerate 8 det rot flow a Sm nuy be stn aa naine pct of ht senate. Sich an aprench however oboe the fc ta hese tor sot (oy) be expec spr of he coe erative but ah ean for fitting the estan of the choice ateratves ‘etre norms and habits nay serve sind function a dein een reac thom ager or ppl’ decison Ti in oul be elated Yo Abels (1976 estat Scson making 1 serps of muying degen of peeaity. A decionrle "eae bayer gen uip when ora more spec Dominance Teste Aor promisog alternative hs been found, the next logical stp sy t0 finding + dominance structure Isto tet wheter the ‘Memmative can be sen as dominant ver the other alternative. tat an alterative ls promising imps that thi alternative seme advange neato other alternatives when tetera tance testing pase. Hence, the most crital function ofthe {tng pase may be find out Whether 2 sroming skeratve ECEION RULES as dsacantaes in relation to other altrratives. Thee are two types of ‘rations which cauld be wed forthe dominance tertng Both

    You might also like