Linear Transformation of One-Dimensional Utility Functions: Empirical Study on the Impact on the Final Ranking of Alternatives in Personal Decisions

Determining one-dimensional utility functions for each objective in multiattribute utility theory takes time and effort from decision makers. They must consider including a decreasing or increasing marginal utility and/or their relative risk attitude, resulting in a nonlinear shape. This assessment is prone to errors and distortions. We analyze to what extent a linear transformation of one-dimensional utility functions compromises the quality of the decision. Therefore, we examine the impact of one-dimensional utility functions on the final ranking of alternatives in practice, focusing on three aspects: the use of (non)linear utility functions, their impact on the ranking of alternatives, and the stability of best alternatives concerning utility differences of alternatives assuming linear transformation. We examine 2,536 carefully modeled personal decisions analyzed by students with the decision support tool Entscheidungsnavi. Our results show that 95.9% of the participants used at least one nonlinear utility function in their decision, and 76.4% of all objectives were evaluated with nonlinear utility functions. Simplifying preference-accurate utility functions with linearization led to a rank reversal of the best alternative in 15.5% of the decisions. The top-three set of alternatives changed in 14% of the decisions. In 98.8% of the decisions, the best alternative could be found in the top three alternatives ranked under linearity. Based on our results, we recommend determining the utility functions preference-accurately using (non)linearity to model the decision as precisely as possible, especially for important decisions. However, no rank reversal for the best alternative was detected in our data set from an absolute utility difference greater than 0.27 between the best and second best alternatives under linearity. In these cases, assuming linear utility functions is useful if decision makers want to save time and effort. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2024.0317 .

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Decision Analysis
Published
2025-12-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2024.0317
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Linear Transformation of One-Dimensional Utility Functions: Empirical Study on the Impact on the Final Ranking of Alternatives in Personal Decisions

Decision Analysis
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
article

Linear Transformation of One-Dimensional Utility Functions: Empirical Study on the Impact on the Final Ranking of Alternatives in Personal Decisions

article en

Abstract

Determining one-dimensional utility functions for each objective in multiattribute utility theory takes time and effort from decision makers. They must consider including a decreasing or increasing marginal utility and/or their relative risk attitude, resulting in a nonlinear shape. This assessment is prone to errors and distortions. We analyze to what extent a linear transformation of one-dimensional utility functions compromises the quality of the decision. Therefore, we examine the impact of one-dimensional utility functions on the final ranking of alternatives in practice, focusing on three aspects: the use of (non)linear utility functions, their impact on the ranking of alternatives, and the stability of best alternatives concerning utility differences of alternatives assuming linear transformation. We examine 2,536 carefully modeled personal decisions analyzed by students with the decision support tool Entscheidungsnavi. Our results show that 95.9% of the participants used at least one nonlinear utility function in their decision, and 76.4% of all objectives were evaluated with nonlinear utility functions. Simplifying preference-accurate utility functions with linearization led to a rank reversal of the best alternative in 15.5% of the decisions. The top-three set of alternatives changed in 14% of the decisions. In 98.8% of the decisions, the best alternative could be found in the top three alternatives ranked under linearity. Based on our results, we recommend determining the utility functions preference-accurately using (non)linearity to model the decision as precisely as possible, especially for important decisions. However, no rank reversal for the best alternative was detected in our data set from an absolute utility difference greater than 0.27 between the best and second best alternatives under linearity. In these cases, assuming linear utility functions is useful if decision makers want to save time and effort. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2024.0317 .

Decision AnalysisVol. 23(1)
Management Center Innsbruck (AT), Westfälische Hochschule (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Linear Transformation of One-Dimensional Utility Functions: Empirical Study on the Impact on the Final Ranking of Alternatives in Personal Decisions · Decision Analysis (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS