Utility Analysis of Five Weighting Methods for Making Consumer Loan Decisions
The economic utility of five weighting methods (unit, weighted application blank, chi-square, Bayes, and regression) for evaluating consumer loan applications was determined. A sample of 443 consumer loans which had been classified as either good or bad accounts was analyzed via 11 predictor variabl...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Educational and psychological measurement 1992-04, Vol.52 (1), p.1-16 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 16 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | Educational and psychological measurement |
| container_volume | 52 |
| creator | Muchinsky, Paul M. Skilling, Nancy J. Langham |
| description | The economic utility of five weighting methods (unit, weighted application blank, chi-square, Bayes, and regression) for evaluating consumer loan applications was determined. A sample of 443 consumer loans which had been classified as either good or bad accounts was analyzed via 11 predictor variables. The predictor variables were weighted by each of the five weighting methods. Cross-validated correlations revealed that consumer credit risk is highly predictable. The five methods differed in the extent to which they produced false positive and false negative selection decisions. Utility assessments revealed that the best methods were the unit and weighted application blank procedures. The findings were discussed in terms of the assessment of credit risk and issues associated with the implementation of decision models by real world decision makers. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/001316449205200101 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_21246499</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ443871</ericid><sage_id>10.1177_001316449205200101</sage_id><sourcerecordid>21246499</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2681-9638e6fc1e789c29d6490dd8d2ccbf55301e13ca78ce0f1ac93cb43450c9420a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtLAzEQgIMoWB9_QDwEFW-rmTx2k2Opb1q8KB6XNJut0e2mJluh_94sLSKKuYTMfPNNkkHoCMgFQFFcEgIMcs4VJYKmA4EtNAAhaMaklNto0ANZT-yivRjfSFocYIAmz51rXLfCw1Y3q-gi9jW-cZ8Wv1g3e-1cO8MT2736KuLaBzzR731o5Nu4nNuAx163-MoaF10KHaCdWjfRHm72ffR8c_00usvGj7f3o-E4MzSXkKmcSZvXBmwhlaGqyrkiVSUrasy0FoIRsMCMLqSxpAZtFDNTzrggRnFKNNtH52vvIviPpY1dOXfR2KbRrfXLWFKgPDlVAk9-gW9-GdJTE0NB5KJQJEGn_0FAFaFUgmSJomvKBB9jsHW5CG6uw6oEUvZDKP8OIRWdbdQ6Gt3UQbfpq74rBZEqJ737eI3Z4Mx39vqBcyaL3nK5Tkc9sz8u93_fL3ramf4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1290228183</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Utility Analysis of Five Weighting Methods for Making Consumer Loan Decisions</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Muchinsky, Paul M. ; Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</creator><creatorcontrib>Muchinsky, Paul M. ; Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</creatorcontrib><description>The economic utility of five weighting methods (unit, weighted application blank, chi-square, Bayes, and regression) for evaluating consumer loan applications was determined. A sample of 443 consumer loans which had been classified as either good or bad accounts was analyzed via 11 predictor variables. The predictor variables were weighted by each of the five weighting methods. Cross-validated correlations revealed that consumer credit risk is highly predictable. The five methods differed in the extent to which they produced false positive and false negative selection decisions. Utility assessments revealed that the best methods were the unit and weighted application blank procedures. The findings were discussed in terms of the assessment of credit risk and issues associated with the implementation of decision models by real world decision makers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0013-1644</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3888</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/001316449205200101</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EPMEAJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Bayesian Statistics ; Biological and medical sciences ; Chi Square ; Comparative Analysis ; Consumer Services ; Cost Effectiveness ; Credit (Finance) ; Decision Making ; Equations (Mathematics) ; Financial Services ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Loan Applications ; Loans ; Mathematical Models ; Predictor Variables ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Psychometrics. Sociometry ; Regression (Statistics) ; Social psychology ; Statistics ; Utility Analysis ; Weighting (Statistical) ; Weights & measures</subject><ispartof>Educational and psychological measurement, 1992-04, Vol.52 (1), p.1-16</ispartof><rights>1992 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Spring 1992</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2681-9638e6fc1e789c29d6490dd8d2ccbf55301e13ca78ce0f1ac93cb43450c9420a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2681-9638e6fc1e789c29d6490dd8d2ccbf55301e13ca78ce0f1ac93cb43450c9420a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/001316449205200101$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/001316449205200101$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27869,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ443871$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=5089603$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Muchinsky, Paul M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</creatorcontrib><title>Utility Analysis of Five Weighting Methods for Making Consumer Loan Decisions</title><title>Educational and psychological measurement</title><description>The economic utility of five weighting methods (unit, weighted application blank, chi-square, Bayes, and regression) for evaluating consumer loan applications was determined. A sample of 443 consumer loans which had been classified as either good or bad accounts was analyzed via 11 predictor variables. The predictor variables were weighted by each of the five weighting methods. Cross-validated correlations revealed that consumer credit risk is highly predictable. The five methods differed in the extent to which they produced false positive and false negative selection decisions. Utility assessments revealed that the best methods were the unit and weighted application blank procedures. The findings were discussed in terms of the assessment of credit risk and issues associated with the implementation of decision models by real world decision makers.</description><subject>Bayesian Statistics</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Chi Square</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Consumer Services</subject><subject>Cost Effectiveness</subject><subject>Credit (Finance)</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Equations (Mathematics)</subject><subject>Financial Services</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Loan Applications</subject><subject>Loans</subject><subject>Mathematical Models</subject><subject>Predictor Variables</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Psychometrics. Sociometry</subject><subject>Regression (Statistics)</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Statistics</subject><subject>Utility Analysis</subject><subject>Weighting (Statistical)</subject><subject>Weights & measures</subject><issn>0013-1644</issn><issn>1552-3888</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1992</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtLAzEQgIMoWB9_QDwEFW-rmTx2k2Opb1q8KB6XNJut0e2mJluh_94sLSKKuYTMfPNNkkHoCMgFQFFcEgIMcs4VJYKmA4EtNAAhaMaklNto0ANZT-yivRjfSFocYIAmz51rXLfCw1Y3q-gi9jW-cZ8Wv1g3e-1cO8MT2736KuLaBzzR731o5Nu4nNuAx163-MoaF10KHaCdWjfRHm72ffR8c_00usvGj7f3o-E4MzSXkKmcSZvXBmwhlaGqyrkiVSUrasy0FoIRsMCMLqSxpAZtFDNTzrggRnFKNNtH52vvIviPpY1dOXfR2KbRrfXLWFKgPDlVAk9-gW9-GdJTE0NB5KJQJEGn_0FAFaFUgmSJomvKBB9jsHW5CG6uw6oEUvZDKP8OIRWdbdQ6Gt3UQbfpq74rBZEqJ737eI3Z4Mx39vqBcyaL3nK5Tkc9sz8u93_fL3ramf4</recordid><startdate>19920401</startdate><enddate>19920401</enddate><creator>Muchinsky, Paul M.</creator><creator>Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage</general><general>Educational and Psychological Measurement, etc</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>EOLOZ</scope><scope>FKUCP</scope><scope>IOIBA</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19920401</creationdate><title>Utility Analysis of Five Weighting Methods for Making Consumer Loan Decisions</title><author>Muchinsky, Paul M. ; Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2681-9638e6fc1e789c29d6490dd8d2ccbf55301e13ca78ce0f1ac93cb43450c9420a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1992</creationdate><topic>Bayesian Statistics</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Chi Square</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Consumer Services</topic><topic>Cost Effectiveness</topic><topic>Credit (Finance)</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Equations (Mathematics)</topic><topic>Financial Services</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Loan Applications</topic><topic>Loans</topic><topic>Mathematical Models</topic><topic>Predictor Variables</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Psychometrics. Sociometry</topic><topic>Regression (Statistics)</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Statistics</topic><topic>Utility Analysis</topic><topic>Weighting (Statistical)</topic><topic>Weights & measures</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Muchinsky, Paul M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 01</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 04</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 29</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Educational and psychological measurement</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Muchinsky, Paul M.</au><au>Skilling, Nancy J. Langham</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ443871</ericid><atitle>Utility Analysis of Five Weighting Methods for Making Consumer Loan Decisions</atitle><jtitle>Educational and psychological measurement</jtitle><date>1992-04-01</date><risdate>1992</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>16</epage><pages>1-16</pages><issn>0013-1644</issn><eissn>1552-3888</eissn><coden>EPMEAJ</coden><abstract>The economic utility of five weighting methods (unit, weighted application blank, chi-square, Bayes, and regression) for evaluating consumer loan applications was determined. A sample of 443 consumer loans which had been classified as either good or bad accounts was analyzed via 11 predictor variables. The predictor variables were weighted by each of the five weighting methods. Cross-validated correlations revealed that consumer credit risk is highly predictable. The five methods differed in the extent to which they produced false positive and false negative selection decisions. Utility assessments revealed that the best methods were the unit and weighted application blank procedures. The findings were discussed in terms of the assessment of credit risk and issues associated with the implementation of decision models by real world decision makers.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/001316449205200101</doi><tpages>16</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0013-1644 |
| ispartof | Educational and psychological measurement, 1992-04, Vol.52 (1), p.1-16 |
| issn | 0013-1644 1552-3888 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_21246499 |
| source | Access via SAGE; Periodicals Index Online |
| subjects | Bayesian Statistics Biological and medical sciences Chi Square Comparative Analysis Consumer Services Cost Effectiveness Credit (Finance) Decision Making Equations (Mathematics) Financial Services Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Loan Applications Loans Mathematical Models Predictor Variables Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Psychometrics. Sociometry Regression (Statistics) Social psychology Statistics Utility Analysis Weighting (Statistical) Weights & measures |
| title | Utility Analysis of Five Weighting Methods for Making Consumer Loan Decisions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T04%3A41%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Utility%20Analysis%20of%20Five%20Weighting%20Methods%20for%20Making%20Consumer%20Loan%20Decisions&rft.jtitle=Educational%20and%20psychological%20measurement&rft.au=Muchinsky,%20Paul%20M.&rft.date=1992-04-01&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=16&rft.pages=1-16&rft.issn=0013-1644&rft.eissn=1552-3888&rft.coden=EPMEAJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/001316449205200101&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E21246499%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1290228183&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ443871&rft_sage_id=10.1177_001316449205200101&rfr_iscdi=true |