A central problem of prescriptive decision making is the mismatch
between the elegant formal models of decision theory and the less
elegant, informal thinking of decision makers, especially when dealing
with ill-structured situations. This problem has been a central concern
of the authors and their colleagues over the past two decades. They have
wisely (to my mind) realized that any viable solution must be informed
by a deep understanding of both the structural properties of alternative
formalisms and the cognitive demands that they impose on decision
makers. Considering the two in parallel reduces the risk of forcing
decision makers to say things and endorse models that they do not really
understand. It opens the door for creative solutions, incorporating
insights from both decision theory and cognitive psychology. It is this
opportunity that the authors have so ably exploited in this important
book. Under the pressures of an interview situation, people will often
answer a question that is put to them. Thus, they may be willing to
provide a decision consultant with probability and utility assessments
for all manner of things. However, if they do not fully understand the
implications of what they are saying and the use to which it will be
put, then they cannot maintain cognitive mastery of the decision models
intended to represent their beliefs and interests.