[Sample B: Approval/Signature Sheet] - George Mason University

6.1 Varying Weights
6. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
In order to check the robustness of the alternative rankings, a sensitivity analysis
was performed by varying the weights. The weights of the higher levels of the objective
hierarchy are of particular importance because ―many of the weights at lower levels
involve technical factors that limit the ability of non-experts to make the required
judgments.‖ 120 Also, the high level weights represent policy judgments, and it is likely
that they could be very different from decision maker to decision maker. 121
Moreover, Winterfeldt and Edwards state that ―it is unlikely that the weight
judgments at lower levels of the value tree deserve to be included in the sensitivity
analysis. Important sensitivities to weights arise at higher levels of those trees.‖ 122
Thus, the first part of the sensitivity analysis was focused on the variation of the
weights of the highest level fundamental objectives: Force Application, Force Awareness,
Force Mobility and Force Support.
120 John C. Butler et al., ―The Adoption of Multiattribute Utility Theory for the Evaluation of Plutonium
Disposition Options in the United States and Russia,‖ in Advances in Decision Analysis: From Foundations
to Applications, ed. Ward Edwards, Ralph F. Miles Jr. Jr, and Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1st ed. (New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 499.
121 Ibid.
122 Winterfeldt and Edwards, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, 414.
79