Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 1989; 28(03): 168-177
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1635564
Original Article
Schattauer GmbH

When Are Additive Models Valid for Evaluating Proposed Research?

D. S. Bunch
1   University of California – Davis
,
D. Cardús
2   Baylor College of Medicine
,
M. J. Fuhrer
2   Baylor College of Medicine
,
R. M. Thrall
3   Rice University USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
14 February 2018 (online)

  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract:

This paper is concerned with a comparison of two broad classes of mathematical models, additive and multiplicative, for selecting the best among a number of competing project proposals addressed to a defined research objective. The analysis is predicated on the view that, though additive models are widely utilized, they are theoretically inferior to multiplicative ones. In an effort to more clearly understand when the use of additive models might be acceptable despite their logical flaws, conditions are investigated under which they yield results that are essentially equivalent to those produced by multiplicative models.

Key-Words:

Benefit-Cost Analysis - Research Proposal Evaluation - Multiplicative and Additive Models - Comparison of Models
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Cardús D, Fuhrer M J, Thrall R M. A benefit-cost approach to the prioritization of rehabilitation research. The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research, and Baylor College of Medicine. 1980. September 25. (Report Grant HEW 12-P-59036/9-03)
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Cardús D, Fuhrer M J, Martin A W, Thrall R M. Use of benefit-cost analysis in the peer review of proposed research. Management Science 1982; 28: 439-45.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Thrall R M, Cardús D. Benefit-cost and cost-effectiveness analysis in rehabilitation research programs. Meth Inform Med 1974; 13: 147-51.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Thrall R M, Cardús D, Fuhrer M J. Multicriterion decision analysis. In: Mathematical Frontiers of the Social and Policy Sciences . Houston: Westview Press; 1981: 131-54.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Baker N, Freeland J. Recent advances in R&D benefit measurement and project selection methods. Management Science 1975; 21: 1164-75.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dawes R M, Corrigan B. Linear Models in Decision Making. Psychol Bull 1974; 81: 95-106.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dawes R. M. The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. Amer Psychol 1979; 34: 571-82.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lord F. M. Cutting scores and errors of measurement. Psychometrika 1962; 27: 1-30.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Thrall R. M. Proofs of theorems for comparison of additive and multiplicative decision models. Working Paper No. 70, Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Administration, Rice University, March. 1989
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Kuhn H W, Tucker A W. Nonlinear programming. In Neyman J. ed Proc Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability . Berkeley: University of California Press; 1951
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Chames A, Cooper W W. Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1961
    Google Scholar