MacGregor D, Slovic P
Risk Anal. 1986 Jun;6(2):245-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1986.tb00212.x.
Three methods for making a consumer product safety decision were evaluated on scales relating to their perceived acceptability, logical soundness, completeness, and sensitivity to moral and ethical concerns. Two of the methods were formalized techniques: cost-benefit analysis and risk analysis. The third method involved abiding by standard industry practices. Other factors in the decision-making context were also varied. The results indicated that formalized techniques were preferred over the standard practices method. Within the formalized methods, cost-benefit analysis was judged less acceptable than a comparable method that did not involve making explicit value tradeoffs. All methods were judged more acceptable when they led to improved product safety. Knowledge of consequences did not exert direct effect on judgments, though it did interact significantly with other variables. The results are discussed in terms of judgmental processes that people apply when evaluating decision methods.
对三种用于做出消费品安全决策的方法，从与它们的感知可接受性、逻辑合理性、完整性以及对道德和伦理问题的敏感性相关的量表进行了评估。其中两种方法是形式化技术：成本效益分析和风险分析。第三种方法是遵循标准行业惯例。决策背景中的其他因素也有所不同。结果表明，形式化技术比标准惯例方法更受青睐。在形式化方法中，成本效益分析被认为比不涉及明确价值权衡的可比方法更不可接受。当所有方法都能提高产品安全性时，它们被认为更可接受。后果知识对判断没有直接影响，不过它确实与其他变量有显著交互作用。根据人们在评估决策方法时应用的判断过程对结果进行了讨论。
