Jianlong Zhou
Ronnie Taib
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
This article presents a framework of adaptive, measurable decision making for Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) by varying decision factors in their types, numbers, and values. Under this framework, decision making is measured using physiological sensors such as Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) and eye-tracking while users are subjected to varying decision quality and difficulty levels. Following this quantifiable decision making, users are allowed to refine several decision factors in order to make decisions of high quality and with low difficulty levels. A case study of driving route selection is used to set up an experiment to test our hypotheses. In this study, GSR features exhibit the best performance in indexing decision quality. These results can be used to guide the design of intelligent user interfaces for decision-related applications in HCI that can adapt to user behavior and decision-making performance.
- M. A. Abdel-Aty, K. M. Vaughn, R. Kitamura, P. P. Jovanis, and F. L. Mannering. 1994. Models of commuters’ information use and route choice: Initial results based on Southern California Commuter Route Choice Survey. Transportation Research Record 1453, 46--55.Google Scholar
- M. Acevedo and J. I. Krueger. 2004. Two egocentric sources of the decision to vote: The voter's illusion and the belief in personal relevance. Political Psychology 25, 1, 115--134.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. S. Azar. 2000. Multiattribute Decision-Making: Use of Three Scoring Methods to Compare the Performance of Imaging Techniques for Breast Cancer Detection. University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
- H. Azizi and S. F. Ajirlu. 2010. Measurement of overall performances of decision-making units using ideal and anti-ideal decision-making units. Computers and Industrial Engineering 59, 3, 411--418. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Bechara, A. R. Damasio, H. Damasio, and S. W. Anderson. 1994. Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition 50, 7--15.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Bechara, H. Damasio, A. R. Damasio, and G. P. Lee. 1999. Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision-making. Journal of Neuroscience 19, 5473--5481.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. R. Bettman, E. J. Johnson, and J. W. Payne. 1990. A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 45, 1, 111--139.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. M. Botvinick and Z. B. Rosen. 2009. Anticipation of cognitive demand during decision-making. Psychological Research 73, 6, 835--842.Google ScholarCross Ref
- W. Boucsein. 2012. Electrodermal Activity, (2nd ed.). Springer.Google Scholar
- O. Bousquet. 2005. Machine Learning Thoughts—Decision Making. Retrieved September 20, 2013 from http://ml.typepad.com/machine_learning_thoughts/2005/06/decisionmaking.html.Google Scholar
- W. Bruine de Bruin, A. M. Parker, and B. Fischhoff. 2007. Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92, 5, 938--956.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Chen, J. Epps, N. Ruiz, and F. Chen. 2011. Eye activity as a measure of human mental effort in HCI. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’11). ACM, New York, NY, 315--318. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. E. Dawson, A. M. Schell, and C. G. Courtney. 2011. The skin conductance response, anticipation, and decision-making. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics 4, 2, 111--116.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Z. Duric et al. 2002. Integrating perceptual and cognitive modeling for adaptive and intelligent human-computer interaction. Proceedings of the IEEE 90, 7, 1272--1289.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Fiedler and A. Glockner. 2012. The dynamics of decision making in risky choice: An eye-tracking analysis. Frontiers in Psychology 3.Google Scholar
- B. Figner and R. O. Murphy. 2011. Using skin conductance in judgment and decision making research. In A Handbook of Process Tracing Methods for Decision Research. M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck, A. Kuehberger, and R. Ranyard (eds.). Psychology Press, New York, 163--184.Google Scholar
- A. M. Franco-Watkins and J. G. Johnson. 2011. Applying the decision moving window to risky choice: Comparison of eye-tracking and mouse-tracing methods. Judgment and Decision Making 6, 8, 740--749.Google Scholar
- L. A. Gutnik, A. F. Hakimzada, N. A. Yoskowitz, and V. L. Patel. 2006. The role of emotion in decision-making: A cognitive neuroeconomic approach towards understanding sexual risk behavior. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 39, 6, 720--736. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Healey and R. Picard. 2000. SmartCar: Detecting driver stress. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Pattern Recognition 2000. 218--221. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. A. Helgee. 2010. Improving Drug Discovery Decision Making Using Machine Learning and Graph Theory in QSAR Modeling. PhD thesis. University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
- A. Holzinger. 2013. Human-computer interaction and knowledge discovery (HCI-KDD): What is the benefit of bringing those two fields to work together? In A. Cuzzocrea, C. Kittl, D. E. Simos, E. Weippl, and L. Xu (eds.). Availability, Reliability, and Security in Information Systems and HCI. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 319--328.Google Scholar
- C.-L. Hwang and K. Yoon. 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- E. Á. Juliusson, N. Karlsson, and T. Gärling. 2005. Weighing the past and the future in decision making. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 17, 4, 561--575.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Kelemen, Y. Liang, and S. Franklin. 2002. A comparative study of different machine learning approaches for decision making. In Recent Advances in Simulation, Computational Methods and Soft Computing. WSEAS Press, 84--141.Google Scholar
- M. Kendall. 1962. Rank Correction Methods (3rd ed). Hafner, New York.Google Scholar
- S.-H. Kim, Z. Dong, H. Xian, B. Upatising, and J. S. Yi. 2012. Does an eye tracker tell the truth about visualizations?: Findings while investigating visualizations for decision making. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18, 12, 2421--2430. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. H. Knorring. 2003. Basic Human Decision Making: An Analysis of Route Choice Decisions by Long-Haul Truckers. Bachelor thesis. Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
- V. Köbberling. 2006. Strength of preference and cardinal utility. Economic Theory 27, 2, 375--391.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Krishnamurthy, G. Thamilarasu, and C. Bauckhage. 2009. MALADY: A machine learning-based autonomous decision-making system for sensor networks. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering 2009. 93--100. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Lertprapai. 2013. Review: Multiple criteria decision making method with applications. International Mathematical Forum 8, 7, 347--355.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Luo and R. Taib. 2013. Assessing recovery from cognitive load through pen input. In CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1353--1358. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. R. MacCrimon. 1968. Decision Making among Multiple Attribute Alternatives: A Survey and Consolidated Approach. RAND Memorandum. The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.Google Scholar
- J. M. McWilliams, C. C. Afendulis, T. G. McGuire, and B. E. Landon. 2011. Complex Medicare advantage choices may overwhelm seniors--especially those with impaired decision making. Health Affairs (Project Hope) 30, 9, 1786--1794.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. V. Neumann. 1944. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- N. Nourbakhsh, Y. Wang, and F. Chen. 2013. GSR and blink features for cognitive load classification. In Proceedings of INTERACT 2013.Google Scholar
- A. V. Oppenheim and R. W. Schafer. 2010. Discrete-Time Signal Processing. Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. K. Payne. 2008. Skin Conductance Response as a Marker of Intuitive Decision Making in Nursing. ProQuest.Google Scholar
- K. Preuschoff, B. M.'t Hart, and W. Einhäuser. 2011. Pupil dilation signals surprise: Evidence for noradrenaline's role in decision making. Frontiers in Neuroscience 5, 115.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. K. Ray and S. Sahu. 1990. Productivity measurement through multi-criteria decision making. Engineering Costs and Production Economics 20, 2, 151--163.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. S. Rotenberg and A. B. Vedenyapin. 1985. GSR as reflection of decision-making under conditions of delay. The Pavlovian Journal of Biological Science: Official Journal of the Pavlovian 20, 1, 11--14.Google Scholar
- M. N. Rothbard. 1977. Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics. Center for Libertarian Studies.Google Scholar
- K. J. Rothman. 2010. Curbing type I and type II errors. European Journal of Epidemiology, 25(4), 223--224.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Sethi-Iyengar, G. Huberman, and W. Jiang. 2004. How much choice is too much? Contributions to 401(k) retirement plans. In Pension Design and Structure: New Lessons from Behavioral Finance. Oxford University Press, 83--95.Google Scholar
- Y. B. Shin, S. Lee, S. G. Chun, and D. Chung. 2013. A critical review of popular multi-criteria decision making methodologies. Issues in Information Systems 14, 1, 358--365.Google Scholar
- P. J. Smith, N. D. Geddes, and R. Beatty. 2009. Human-centered design of decision-support systems. In A. Sears and J. A. Jacko (eds). Human-Computer Interaction: Design Issues, Solutions, and Applications. CRC Press.Google Scholar
- K. E. Stanovich and R. F. West. 2008. On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94, 4, 672--695.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Stickel, M. Ebner, S. Steinbach-Nordmann, G. Searle, and A. Holzinger. 2009. Emotion detection: Application of the valence arousal space for rapid biological usability testing to enhance universal access. In C. Stephanidis (ed). Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Addressing Diversity. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 615--624. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. K. Vemulapalli, V. Monga, and S. N. Brennan. 2013. Robust extrema features for time-series data analysis. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 35, 6, 1464--1479. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Veropoulos. 2001. Machine Learning Approaches to Medical Decision Making. PhD thesis. University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
- W. Wang, Z. Li, Y. Wang, and F. Chen. 2013. Indexing cognitive workload based on pupillary response under luminance and emotional changes. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’13). ACM, New York, NY, 247--256. Google ScholarDigital Library
- XEROX. 2013. Xerox Researchers Hit The Streets to Help Unclog Highways, Reduce Pollution and Find You a Parking Space. Retrieved September 20, 2013 from http://news.xerox.com/news/Xerox-researchers-create-new-transportation-applications.Google Scholar
- H. Xu. 2009. Robust Decision Making and Its Applications in Machine Learning. PhD thesis. McGill University, Montréal, Canada. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Xu et al. 2011. Pupillary response-based cognitive workload index under luminance and emotional changes. In CHI’11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 1627--1632. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J.-B. Yang and P. Sen. 1994. A general multi-level evaluation process for hybrid MADM with uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 24, 10, 1458--1473.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J.-B. Yang and D.-L. Xu. 2013. Evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination. Artificial Intelligence 205, 1--29. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Q. Zhou and Z. Huang. 2012. A decision-making method using knowledge-based machine learning. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Science and Electronics Engineering 2012. 616--620. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Measurable Decision Making with GSR and Pupillary Analysis for Intelligent User Interface
Recommendations
The design of AHPEC in web-based decision support system for making decision
AIC'10/BEBI'10: Proceedings of the 10th WSEAS international conference on applied informatics and communications, and 3rd WSEAS international conference on Biomedical electronics and biomedical informaticsThis paper presents the architecture of the WDSS using AHPEC for making decision. The WDSS-AHPEC involves client, user interface, server, web server, database, and DSS model. The DSS model in this study is using AHPEC method. In applying AHPEC, it ...
Experience-Based Decision Making: A Satisficing Decision Tree Approach
This paper introduces a framework of experienced-based decision making as an extension of case-based decision making, a recently proposed alternative to expected utility theory. In experienced-based decision making, an agent faced with a new decision ...
Collaborative Decision Making
<P>A synthesis of the work of three noted authors provides a framework for collaborative decisions built on the foundation of decision analysis. A Nobel Prize winner provides a psychological foundation for the framework, an authority on harnessing the ...
Comments