IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joinma/v28y2017i7d10.1007_s10845-016-1240-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision theoretic modeling of affective and cognitive needs for product experience engineering: key issues and a conceptual framework

Author

Listed:
  • Roger J. Jiao

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Feng Zhou

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Chih-Hsing Chu

    (National Tsing Hua University)

Abstract

User experience (UX) design plays a critical role in product experience engineering. To create a theoretical foundation of UX design, it is imperative to develop mathematical and computational models for elicitation, quantification, evaluation and reasoning of affective–cognitive needs that are inherent in the fulfillment of user experience. This paper explores the key research issues for understanding how human users’ subjective experience and affective prediction impact their choice behavior under uncertainty. A conceptual framework is envisioned by extending prospect theory in the field of behavioral economics to the modeling of user experience choice behavior, in which inference of affective influence is enacted through the shape parameters of prospect value functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger J. Jiao & Feng Zhou & Chih-Hsing Chu, 2017. "Decision theoretic modeling of affective and cognitive needs for product experience engineering: key issues and a conceptual framework," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 28(7), pages 1755-1767, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joinma:v:28:y:2017:i:7:d:10.1007_s10845-016-1240-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10845-016-1240-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10845-016-1240-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10845-016-1240-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    2. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    3. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    4. Ali E. Abbas, 2009. "Multiattribute Utility Copulas," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1367-1383, December.
    5. Liebscher, Eckhard, 2008. "Construction of asymmetric multivariate copulas," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 99(10), pages 2234-2250, November.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, September.
    8. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    9. Kahneman, Daniel, 2002. "Maps of Bounded Rationality," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2002-4, Nobel Prize Committee.
    10. David E. Bell, 1985. "Disappointment in Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 1-27, February.
    11. Patricia Mariela Morillas, 2005. "A method to obtain new copulas from a given one," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 169-184, April.
    12. Colin Camerer, 1998. "Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Making," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(2), pages 163-183, September.
    13. Jonathan Ingersoll, 2008. "Non‐Monotonicity of the Tversky‐Kahneman Probability‐Weighting Function: A Cautionary Note," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 14(3), pages 385-390, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liang Hou & Roger J. Jiao, 2020. "Data-informed inverse design by product usage information: a review, framework and outlook," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 529-552, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ivan Barreda-Tarrazona & Ainhoa Jaramillo-Gutierrez & Daniel Navarro-Martinez & Gerardo Sabater-Grande, 2014. "The role of forgone opportunities in decision making under risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 167-188, October.
    2. Astrid Hopfensitz & Frans Winden, 2008. "Dynamic Choice, Independence and Emotions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 249-300, March.
    3. Graham Loomes & Ganna Pogrebna, 2014. "Testing for independence while allowing for probabilistic choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 189-211, December.
    4. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Ted O'Donoghue & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2013. "The Nature of Risk Preferences: Evidence from Insurance Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2499-2529, October.
    5. Marie Pfiffelmann, 2011. "Solving the St. Petersburg Paradox in cumulative prospect theory: the right amount of probability weighting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 325-341, September.
    6. Valeri Zakamouline & Steen Koekebakker, 2009. "A Generalisation of the Mean†Variance Analysis," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 15(5), pages 934-970, November.
    7. Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & Michael S. Hand & David E. Calkin & Tyron J. Venn & Matthew P. Thompson, 2013. "Risk Preferences in Strategic Wildfire Decision Making: A Choice Experiment with U.S. Wildfire Managers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1021-1037, June.
    8. Herweg, Fabian & Müller, Daniel, 2021. "A comparison of regret theory and salience theory for decisions under risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    9. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda, 2012. "The missing link: unifying risk taking and time discounting," ECON - Working Papers 096, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2018.
    10. Doron Sonsino, 2008. "Disappointment Aversion in internet Bidding-Decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 363-393, March.
    11. Georgalos, Konstantinos & Paya, Ivan & Peel, David, 2024. "The Kőszegi–Rabin expectations-based model and risk-apportionment tasks for elicitation of higher order risk preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 749-770.
    12. Liang Zou, 2006. "An Alternative to Prospect Theory," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, May.
    13. Tianyang Wang & Robert G. Schwebach & Sriram V. Villupuram, 2022. "Reference point formation: Does the market whisper in the background?," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 45(2), pages 384-421, June.
    14. Sautua, Santiago I., 2017. "Does uncertainty cause inertia in decision making? An experimental study of the role of regret aversion and indecisiveness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1-14.
    15. Meng, Jingyi & Webb, Craig S. & Zank, Horst, 2024. "Mixture independence foundations for expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    16. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    17. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier L’Haridon & Horst Zank, 2010. "Separating curvature and elevation: A parametric probability weighting function," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 39-65, August.
    18. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thierry Post, 2011. "Loss Aversion with a State-Dependent Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1094-1110, June.
    20. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joinma:v:28:y:2017:i:7:d:10.1007_s10845-016-1240-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.