Business & Information Systems Engineering

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 165–175 | Cite as

A Self-regulating Information Acquisition Algorithm for Preventing Choice Regret in Multi-perspective Decision Making

  • Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga
  • Debora Di Caprio
  • Madjid TavanaEmail author


In a world filled with an increasing number of choices people must carefully select the information they acquire in order to make sound decisions that they will not regret in the future. This ranges from everyday life decisions to those made by experts in the business world. The authors introduce a novel information acquisition algorithm based on the value that information has when preventing a decision maker from regretting his or her current decision. The main features of the model include the capacity to account for different risk attitudes of the decision maker as well as his or her forward-looking behavior, the ability to assess choice objects (projects or products) defined by multiple characteristics and a self-regulation mechanism for the information acquisition process, even in the absence of information acquisition costs. The main properties of the algorithm are examined numerically.


Sequential information acquisition Value of information Choice regret Utility theory 


  1. Abbas AE, Bakır NO, Klutke GA, Sun Z (2013) Effects of risk aversion on the value of information in two-action decision problems. Decision Analysis 10(3):257–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakir NO, Klutke GA (2011) Information and preference reversals in lotteries. European Journal of Operational Research 210(3):752–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carr N (2011) The shallows: what the Internet is doing to our brains. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen YC, Shang RA, Kao CY (2009) The effects of information overload on consumers’ subjective state towards buying decision in the Internet shopping environment. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 8(1):48–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Citroen CL (2011) The role of information in strategic decision-making. International Journal of Information Management 31(6):493–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clemons EK (2008) How information changes consumer behavior and how consumer behavior determines corporate strategy. Journal of Management Information Systems 25(2):13–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Bekker-Grob EW, Chorus CG (2013) Random regret-based discrete-choice modelling: an application to healthcare. Pharmacoeconomics 31(7):623–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Delquie P (2008) The value of information and intensity of preference. Decision Analysis 5(3):129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Di Caprio D, Santos-Arteaga FJ (2009) An optimal information gathering algorithm. International Journal of Applied Decision Sciences 2(2):105–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Di Caprio D, Santos-Arteaga FJ (2011) Strategic diffusion of information and preference manipulation. International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences 2(2):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Di Caprio D, Santos-Arteaga FJ, Tavana M (2013) The optimal sequential information acquisition structure: a rational utility-maximizing perspective. Applied Mathematical Modelling (in press). doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2013.12.003 Google Scholar
  12. Frazier PI, Powell WB (2010) Paradoxes in learning and the marginal value of information. Decision Analysis 7(4):378–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gefen D, Benbasat I, Pavlou PA (2008) A research agenda for trust in online environments. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(4):275–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodwin P, Wright G (2004) Decision analysis for management judgment, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Kahneman D, Tversky A (2000) Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Lancaster KJ (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy 74(2):132–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mackie SI, Begg SH, Smith C, Welsh MB (2007) Decision type – a key to realising the potential of decision making under uncertainty. APPEA Journal 47(1):309–319Google Scholar
  18. Mas-Colell A, Whinston MD, Green JR (1995) Microeconomic theory. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Massey C, Robinson D, Kaniel R (2006) Can’t wait to look in the mirror: the impact of experience on better-than-average effect. In: Proc annual INFORM meeting, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  20. McCall B, McCall J (2007) The economics of search, vol 1. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Medhurst J, Stanton IM, Bird H, Berry A (2009) The value of information to decision makers: an experimental approach using card-based decision gaming. Journal of the Operational Research Society 60(6):747–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mintzberg M (1978) Patterns in strategy formulation. Management Science 24(9):934–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. O’Reilly CA (1982) Variations in decision makers’ use of information sources: the impact of quality and accessibility of information. The Academy of Management Journal 25(4):756–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ponssard JP (1976) On the concept of the value of information in competitive situations. Management Science 22(7):739–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sandler T (1993) The economic-theory of alliances – a survey. Journal of Conflict Resolution 37(3):446–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sarangee K, Schmidt JB, Wallman JP (2013) Clinging to slim chances: the dynamics of anticipating regret when developing new products. Journal of Product Innovation Management. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12041 Google Scholar
  27. Schepanski A, Uecker WC (1984) The value of information in decision making. Journal of Economic Psychology 5(2):177–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shepherd DA, Levesque M (2002) A search strategy for assessing a business opportunity. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 49(2):140–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith JE, Ulu C (2012) Technology adoption with uncertain future costs and quality. Operations Research 60(2):262–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Srikanth M, Kesavan HK, Roe P (2003) Computation of the MinMax measure. In: Karmeshu (ed) Entropy measures, maximum entropy principle and emerging applications. Studies in fuzziness and soft computing, vol 119. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ulu C, Smith JE (2009) Uncertainty, information acquisition, and technology adoption. Operations Research 57(3):740–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vilkkumaa E, Liesiö J, Salo A (2014) Optimal strategies for selecting project portfolios using uncertain value estimates. European Journal of Operational Research 233(3):772–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wakker P (1989) Additive representations of preferences: a new foundation of decision analysis. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Williams TM, Samset K, Sunnevåg KJ (2009) Making essential choices with scant information. Palgrave Macmillan, BasingstokeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Xianzhong D, Xu M, Kaye GR (2002) Knowledge workers for information support: executives’ perceptions and problems. Information Systems Management 19(1):81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga
    • 1
  • Debora Di Caprio
    • 2
    • 3
  • Madjid Tavana
    • 4
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Departamento de Economía Aplicada II and Instituto Complutense de Estudios InternacionalesUniversidad Complutense de MadridPozueloSpain
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Polo Tecnologico IISS G. GalileiBolzanoItaly
  4. 4.Business Systems and Analytics Department, Lindback Distinguished Chair of Information Systems and Decision SciencesLa Salle UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  5. 5.Business Information Systems Department, Faculty of Business Administration and EconomicsUniversity of PaderbornPaderbornGermany

Personalised recommendations