Experimental studies of sequential selection and assignment with relative ranks

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 229-250

  Bearden, J Neil ^a,d   Rapoport, Amnon ^a,b   Murphy, Ryan O ^c,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

^c Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^d DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e The Sanford C Bernstein Co Center for Leadership and Ethics   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Experiments; Framing effects; Middleness bias; Normative benchmarks; Optional stopping; Secretary problem; Selection and assignment

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746031908     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: 10990771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.521     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Albright, S. C. (1974). Optimal sequential assignments with random arrival times. Management Science, 21, 60-67.
2. Albright, S. C., & Derman, C. (1972). Asymptotic optimal policies for the stochastic sequential assignment problem. Management Science, 19, 46-51.
3. Bearden, J. N., Murphy, R. O., & Rapoport, A. (2005). A multi-attribute extension of the secretary problem: theory and experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49, 410-425.
4. Bond, R. J., Kortbeck, J. B., & Preshaw, R. M. (1997). Field trauma triage: combining mechanism of injury with prehospital index for an improved trauma triage tool. Journal of Trauma, 43, 283-287.
5. Brehmer, B., & Allard, R. (1991). Real-time dynamic decision making: effects of task complexity and feedback delays. In J. Rasmussen, B. Brehmer, & J. Leplat (Eds.), Distributed decision making: Cognitive models for cooperative work. Chichester: Wiley.
6. Chun, Y. H. (1996). On the rank-based selection strategy for the group interview problem. Decision Sciences, 27, 801816.
7. Chun, Y. H., & Sumichrast, R. T. (in press). A rank-based approach to the sequential selection and assignment problem. European Journal of Operational Research.
8. Corbin, R. M., Olson, C. L., & Abbondanza, M. (1975). Context effects in optimal stopping decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 14, 207-216.
9. David, I. (1995). Sequential assignment match process with general renewal arrival times. Probability of Engineering Information Science, 9, 475-492.
10. David, I., & Yechiali, U. (1985). A time-dependent stopping problem with application to live organ transplant. Operations Research, 33, 491-504.
11. David, I., & Yechiali, U. (1990). Sequential assignment match processes with arrival of candidates and offers. Probability of Engineering Information Science, 4, 413-430.
12. Derman, C., Lieberman, G. J., & Ross, S. M. (1972). A sequential stochastic assignment problem. Management Science, 18, 349-355.
13. Ferguson, T. S. (1989). Who solved the secretary problem? Statistical Science, 4, 282-296.
14. Freeman, P. R. (1983). The secretary problem and its extensions: a review. International Statistical Review, 51, 189-206.
15. Gilbert, J., & Mosteller, F. (1966). Recognizing the maximum of a sequence. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 61, 35-73.
16. Hornberger, J., & Ahn, J.-H. (1997). Deciding eligibility for transplantation when a donor kidney becomes available. Medical Decision Making, 17, 160-170.
17. Jagacinski, R. J., & Miller, R. A. (1978). Describing the human operator's internal model of a dynamic system. Human Factors, 20, 425-433.
18. Kennedy, D. P. (1986). Optimal sequential assignment. Mathematics of Operations Research, 11, 619-626.
19. Kirlik, A., Miller, R. A., & Jagacinski, R. J. (1993). Supervisory control in a dynamic and uncertain environment: a process model of skilled human-environment interaction. IEEE Transactions of Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 23, 929-952.
20. Klienmuntz, D., & Thomas, J. (1987). The value of action and inference in dynamic decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 3341-3364.
21. Rapoport, A., & Tversky, A. (1970). Effects of search cost on sequential search behavior. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 234-240.
22. Sakaguchi, M. (1984). A sequential stochastic assignment problem with an unknown number of kidneys. Mathematical Journal of Japan, 29, 141-152.
23. Samuels, S. M. (1991). Secretary problems. In B. K. Ghosh, & P. K. Sen (Eds.), Handbook of sequential analysis (pp. 381-405). New York: Marcel Dekker.
24. Scale, D. A., & Rapoport, A. (1997). Sequential decision making with relative ranks: an experimental investigation of the "secretary problem." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 221-236.
25. Scale, D. A., & Rapoport, A. (2000). Optimal stopping behavior with relative ranks: the secretary problem with unknown population size. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 391-411.
26. Simonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: the case for attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 158-174.
27. Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1992). Choice in context: tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 281-295.
28. Stein, W. E., Seale, D. A., & Rapoport, A. (2003). Analysis of heuristic solutions to the best choice problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 51, 140-152.
29. Su, X., & Zenios, S. (2002). Allocation of kidneys to autonomous transplant candidates: a sequential stochastic assignment model. Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, unpublished manuscript.
30. Zwick, R., Rapoport, A., Lo, A. K. C., & Muthokrishnan, A. V. (2003). Consumer sequential search: not enough or too much? Marketing Science, 22, 503-519.