Abstract
The past decade has seen a considerable development of techniques designed to help decision makers faced with problems involving conflicting objectives. In particular, a family of methods known collectively as interactive multi-objective programming has come to the fore. This paper presents the underlying rationale of such methods, albeit as seen by a devil's advocate, briefly surveys some areas of application, but then questions the validity of these methods because their assumptions are not supported by the empirical results of behavioural decision theory.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: