A new approach to button design has recently been proposed that uses natural segments, instead of even intervals, on the weight value range in determining the number of tabs that should be incorporated in a button system and the value each button carries. Button systems so designed do not have the problems of redundancy and underrepresentation that are common to the conventionally designed button systems. Presently limited to the map overlays that involve only two parent maps, this approach is extended to the case of three parent maps in this paper.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarronF H, 1988, “Limits and extensions of equal weights in additive multi attribute models”Acta Psychological68142–152
2.
BarronF HBarrettB E, 1996, “Decision quality using ranked attribute weights”Management Science421515–1525
3.
ChurchmanC WAckoffR L, 1953, “An approximate measure of value”Operations Research2172–181
4.
HobbsB F, 1980, “A comparison of weighting methods in power plant siting”Decision Sciences11725–737
5.
HolmesJ C, 1972, “An ordinal method of evaluation”Urban Studies9179–199
6.
HolmesJ C, 1973, “An ordinal method of evaluation: a rejoinder”Urban Studies10101–104
7.
KeeneyR LRaiffaH, 1976Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs (John Wiley, New York)
8.
KirkwoodC WCornerJ L, 1993, “The effectiveness of partial information about attribute weights for ranking alternatives in multiattribute decision making”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes54456–476
9.
KlostermanR E, 1999, “The What if? collaborate planning support system”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design26393–408
10.
MillerG A, 1956, “The magic number of seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information”Psychological Review63(2) 81–97
11.
SecundaSCollinM LMelloulA J, 1998, “Groundwater vulnerability assessment using a composite model combining DRASTIC with extensive agricultural land use in Israel's Sharon region”Journal of Environmental Management5439–57
12.
SrivastavaJConnollyTBeachL R, 1995, “Do ranks suffice? A comparison of alternative weighting approaches in value elicitation”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes63(1) 112–116
13.
ValentP JYoungD K, 1995, “Abyssal seafloor waste isolation: environmental report”, NRL/MR/7401-95-7576, Naval Research Laboratory, Stennis Space Center, MS 39529–5004
14.
WhitleyD LXiangW-NYoungJ J, 1993, “Use a GIS ‘melting pot’ to assess land us suitability”GIS World6(7) 48–51
15.
XiangW-N, 2000, “A theoretical framework for weight-value set construction in land suitability assessment”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design27599–614
16.
XiangW-N, 2001, “Weighting-by-choosing: a weight elicitation method for map overlays”Landscape and Urban Planning56(1–2) 61–73
17.
XiangW-NSalmonF W, 2001, “Button design for weighted map overlays”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28655–670
18.
ZadehL A, 1973, “Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes”IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics3(1) 28–44
