Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a bounded trade-off reasoning framework for multi-attribute decision-making, challenging the classical assumption of fully compensatory utility aggregation. By incorporating a trade-off tolerance parameter that varies across contexts, the model captures the nuanced ways in which individuals evaluate gains and losses, leading to distinct preference patterns. Simulation results demonstrate that this approach aligns more closely with observed human behavior than traditional utility-based models, offering new insights into decision-making processes.
Human decision-making is governed by a bounded trade-off screening process that reveals how context shapes our preferences in multi-attribute choices.
Human decision-making often involves choosing between multi-attribute alternatives, yet classical models assume fully compensatory utility aggregation despite evidence that people reject options with poor performance on critical attributes. We propose a bounded trade-off reasoning framework in which decisions are governed by a screening process that evaluates the balance between gains and losses across attributes. The model introduces a trade-off tolerance parameter that controls acceptable imbalance and can vary across contexts. Through simulation, we show that this mechanism produces preference patterns that differ from standard utility-based models and captures context-dependent variation in trade-off behavior. These results establish bounded trade-off screening as a plausible computational mechanism for multi-attribute choice and generate testable predictions for future behavioral studies.