Search

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process - from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved.

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process - from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved.

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process – from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved., CC BY-NC 4.0 DEED© 2024 The AuthorsCorrespondence Address: L. Mittermeier; University of Skövde, School of Engineering Science, Sweden; email: ludwig.mittermeier@his.se

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process - from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved.

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process - from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved.

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process - from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved.

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process – from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved., CC BY-NC 4.0 DEED© 2024 The AuthorsCorrespondence Address: L. Mittermeier; University of Skövde, School of Engineering Science, Sweden; email: ludwig.mittermeier@his.se

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process – from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved., CC BY-NC 4.0 DEED© 2024 The AuthorsCorrespondence Address: L. Mittermeier; University of Skövde, School of Engineering Science, Sweden; email: ludwig.mittermeier@his.se

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process – from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved., CC BY-NC 4.0 DEED© 2024 The AuthorsCorrespondence Address: L. Mittermeier; University of Skövde, School of Engineering Science, Sweden; email: ludwig.mittermeier@his.se

Group decision making is traditionally a human-centered process, where communication, synchronization and agreement are driven by the stakeholders involved. In the area of multi-objective optimization (MOO), this becomes a challenge, because MOO usually produces a large amount of trade-off solutions that need to be analyzed and discussed by the stakeholders. Moreover, for transparent group decision making, it is important that each decision maker is able to trace the entire decision process – from associated data and models to problem formulation and solution generation, as well as to the preferences and analyses of other decision makers. A graph database is capable of capturing such diverse information in the form of a knowledge graph. It can be used to store and query all dependencies and hence can support complex decision-making tasks. Further advantages are the inherent suitability for visualization and the possibilities for pattern matching, graph analytics and, if semantically enriched, to infer new connections in the graph. In this paper, we show how such a knowledge graph can be used to support more transparent and traceable decision-making activities, particularly when multiple stakeholders with differing preferences or perspectives are involved., CC BY-NC 4.0 DEED© 2024 The AuthorsCorrespondence Address: L. Mittermeier; University of Skövde, School of Engineering Science, Sweden; email: ludwig.mittermeier@his.se

2023 Descuento MDPI, In the digital era, companies have experienced a progressive change in their business models, which has led them to develop greater agility to adapt to changing environments, and the necessity to properly manage the group decision making in these companies is patent. This paper shows how fuzzy models are utilized in group decision making. In this context, one of the most important group decisions to be adopted is how to manage the digital transformation of the company, drawing up the best possible roadmap. To achieve this goal, this paper proposes a new methodology improvement of group decision making based on a fuzzy 2-tuple linguistic model and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. The suggested methodology proposes the calculation of the digital maturity level (DML) of companies based on five of the most cited and agreed upon criteria in the existing literature. The methodology proposed in this paper was tested and validated for the business case of Spanish SMEs through three different clusters to derive global recommendations tailored to each specific cluster and company segments, using a sample of 1428 companies. The main fundings reveal that the digital maturity level directly impacts on the size of the company and its digital mindset in the sense of driving change management processes. As future works, authors recommend extending the model to any industry using the proposed methodology and evaluate disruptive technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) in supporting the digital transformation of SMEs., Sección Deptal. de Sistemas Informáticos y Computación, Fac. de Estudios Estadísticos, TRUE, pub, Descuento UCM

In many contexts individuals are subject to norms and decisions they disagree with ideologically. What is the effect of regularly being in an ideological minority on the propensity to confront majority norms and decisions? We study this in an ideologically-salient field setting - US appeals courts - using exogenous predictors of ideology and random assignment of judges. We find that ideological interaction silences extremists: Judges who are ideologically extreme relative to their peers are less confrontational - dissent less often - than other judges, despite shaping case outcomes the least. Considering many mechanisms, we find that a model of peer pressure where agents perceive concave ideological costs can explain the observations.

Collective behaviours, such as flocking in birds or decision making by bee colonies, are some of the most intriguing behavioural phenomena in the animal kingdom. The study of collective behaviour focuses on the interactions between individuals within groups, which typically occur over close ranges and short timescales, and how these interactions drive larger scale properties such as group size, information transfer within groups and group-level decision making. To date, however, most studies have focused on snapshots, typically studying collective behaviour over short timescales up to minutes or hours. However, being a biological trait, much longer timescales are important in animal collective behaviour, particularly how individuals change over their lifetime (the domain of developmental biology) and how individuals change from one generation to the next (the domain of evolutionary biology). Here, we give an overview of collective behaviour across timescales from the short to the long, illustrating how a full understanding of this behaviour in animals requires much more research attention on its developmental and evolutionary biology. Our review forms the prologue of this special issue, which addresses and pushes forward understanding the development and evolution of collective behaviour, encouraging a new direction for collective behaviour research. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Collective behaviour through time'.

Since Arrow's main theorem showed the impossibility of a rational procedure in group decision making, many variations in restrictions and objectives have been introduced in order to find out the limits of such a negative result. But so far all those results are often presented as a proof of the great expected difficulties we always shall find pursuing a joint group decision from different individual opinions, if we pursue rational and ethical procedures. In this paper we shall review some of the alternative approaches fuzzy sets theory allows, showing among other things that the main assumption of Arrow's model, not being made explicit in his famous theorem, was its underlying binary logic (a crisp definition is implied in preferences, consistency, liberty, equality, consensus and every concept or piece of information). Moreover, we shall also point out that focusing the problem on the choice issue can be also misleading, at least when dealing with human behaviour., Depto. de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, Fac. de Ciencias Matemáticas, TRUE, pub

The majority rule is frequently presented as a cornerstone of any democratic society, guiding many group decision-making processes where final decision requires the agreement of more than half the people involved. But sometimes, some key decisions require a higher level of agreement. In such cases, an added value would be to reach some consensus about the decision-making problem. Decision making under consensus drives to decisions which are better accepted and appreciated. But it also implies a greater complexity and time consuming process to reach a final decision, and it may even lead to a deadlock or unsuccessful results, whenever the searched agreement is not achieved. Meanwhile, these problems arise because the requirements to achieve the consensus are too strong, and different processes have softened their requirements. In particular, soft consensus is one of the most widespread consensus reaching processes that uses fuzzy logic to soften the consensus requirements. However, several problems still persist despite the softening of the requirements. In this paper, we are going to make a brief revision of the different concepts about consensus and about different consensus reaching processes, both in the crisp and fuzzy environment. We shall then analyze how to overcome their lacks, indicating the challenges facing these processes in order to obtain successful results in those group decision problems in which they are required to make a decision under consensus., Depto. de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, Fac. de Ciencias Matemáticas, TRUE, pub

Various social influences affect group decision-making processes. For instance, individuals may adapt their behavior to fit in with the group's majority opinion. Furthermore, ingroup favoritism may lead individuals to favor the ideas of ingroup members rather than the outgroup. So far, little is explored on how these phenomena of social conformity and ingroup favoritism manifest in group decision-making processes when a group has to decide in favor or against an item. We address such a scenario where the 'flipping direction' of conformity (in favor or against an item) matters. Specifically, we explore whether and how the ingroup favoritism manifests differently in terms of conformity behavior depending on the 'flipping direction'. The results show that group inclusiveness does not play a role in the general tendency to conform. However, when it comes to a negative flipping direction, a higher feeling of group inclusiveness seems to play a role; yet, for individualist cultures only.

This study focuses on teachers’ group decision making during Dutch allocation meetings. A previous interview study showed that teachers question the objectivity of decisions due to negative interaction experiences and a lack of structure during these meetings. To characterize the structure and interaction of these meetings, 33 student allocations were observed. Results showed a variety of structures and interactions, including differences in the degree to which the meetings met criteria relevant to achieving objective allocation decisions. It can be concluded that – based on the criteria of acceptance, fairness, and transparency as used in this study – allocation meetings need to be well-prepared and substantiated, to allow for every teacher’s opinion to be heard, and follow a procedure that is clear to everyone. In view of students’ future school careers, it is important to pay close attention to functional interaction and structured discussions that ensure transparent, acceptable and fair decision-making.

A generic framework for designing decision theaters (DTs) is proposed. The implementation of this framework is illustrated on community forest management in the province of Québec. In particular, we develop the conceptual design of an integrated Forest Community Decision Support System (FC-DSS). FC-DSS aims at supporting complex forest management planning that involves governmental planners and multiple forest users.

This study focuses on teachers’ group decision making during Dutch allocation meetings. A previous interview study showed that teachers question the objectivity of decisions due to negative interaction experiences and a lack of structure during these meetings. To characterize the structure and interaction of these meetings, 33 student allocations were observed. Results showed a variety of structures and interactions, including differences in the degree to which the meetings met criteria relevant to achieving objective allocation decisions. It can be concluded that – based on the criteria of acceptance, fairness, and transparency as used in this study – allocation meetings need to be well-prepared and substantiated, to allow for every teacher’s opinion to be heard, and follow a procedure that is clear to everyone. In view of students’ future school careers, it is important to pay close attention to functional interaction and structured discussions that ensure transparent, acceptable and fair decision-making.

National Assessment and Accreditation Council is an impartial group of the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India, mounted in 1994. It has taken the duty of assessing and accrediting faculties and universities in India to encourage the instructional surroundings for the development of excellence in teaching, learning, and discovery in superior training. In those missions, NAAC acts a dynamic role. NAAC has been worried about reforming its ongoing Valuation and Certification policies, grounded on its arena, its shared statistics with different International Quality Assurance Agencies, and the best necessities within side the worlds converting the state of affairs over the progressive training development. In this paper, a new mathematical model is developed to explore the NAAC rating of a well-known Engineering College, considering nine more well-known Engineering Colleges. The system is characterized by NAAC Accreditation Criteria using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods, Statistics, and Group Decision Making

National Assessment and Accreditation Council is an impartial group of the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India, mounted in 1994. It has taken the duty of assessing and accrediting faculties and universities in India to encourage the instructional surroundings for the development of excellence in teaching, learning, and discovery in superior training. In those missions, NAAC acts a dynamic role. NAAC has been worried about reforming its ongoing Valuation and Certification policies, grounded on its arena, its shared statistics with different International Quality Assurance Agencies, and the best necessities within side the worlds converting the state of affairs over the progressive training development. In this paper, a new mathematical model is developed to explore the NAAC rating of a well-known Engineering College, considering nine more well-known Engineering Colleges. The system is characterized by NAAC Accreditation Criteria using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods, Statistics, and Group Decision Making

National Assessment and Accreditation Council is an impartial group of the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India, mounted in 1994. It has taken the duty of assessing and accrediting faculties and universities in India to encourage the instructional surroundings for the development of excellence in teaching, learning, and discovery in superior training. In those missions, NAAC acts a dynamic role. NAAC has been worried about reforming its ongoing Valuation and Certification policies, grounded on its arena, its shared statistics with different International Quality Assurance Agencies, and the best necessities within side the worlds converting the state of affairs over the progressive training development. In this paper, a new mathematical model is developed to explore the NAAC rating of a well-known Engineering College, considering nine more well-known Engineering Colleges. The system is characterized by NAAC Accreditation Criteria using Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods, Statistics, and Group Decision Making

Одрживи индустријски развој директно је повезан са стварањем повољних услова за спровођење иновативних активности. Главни изазов на пољу управљања иновацијама је избор и рангирање индикатора који омогућавају стварање иновација, како на нивоу државе / регије (макро нивоу), тако и на нивоу предузећа (микро нивоу).Oво истраживање је спроведено за оба нивоа одвојено. Рангирање индикатора на макро нивоу извршено је за појединачне државе чланице ЕУ и за ЕУ као јединствену регију За ту сврху примењена је метода статистичког учења. На микро нивоу, урађена је студија случаја за рангирање индикатора иновацијског потенцијала за сектор ММСП у Србији, коришћeњем методe структурираног упитника и методe вишекритеријумске анализе. Резултати истраживања пружају прилику да се укаже на значај појединих индикатора у процесу стварања иновације, како на макро тако и на микро нивоу., Održivi industrijski razvoj direktno je povezan sa stvaranjem povoljnih uslova za sprovođenje inovativnih aktivnosti. Glavni izazov na polju upravljanja inovacijama je izbor i rangiranje indikatora koji omogućavaju stvaranje inovacija, kako na nivou države / regije (makro nivou), tako i na nivou preduzeća (mikro nivou).Ovo istraživanje je sprovedeno za oba nivoa odvojeno. Rangiranje indikatora na makro nivou izvršeno je za pojedinačne države članice EU i za EU kao jedinstvenu regiju Za tu svrhu primenjena je metoda statističkog učenja. Na mikro nivou, urađena je studija slučaja za rangiranje indikatora inovacijskog potencijala za sektor MMSP u Srbiji, korišćenjem metode strukturiranog upitnika i metode višekriterijumske analize. Rezultati istraživanja pružaju priliku da se ukaže na značaj pojedinih indikatora u procesu stvaranja inovacije, kako na makro tako i na mikro nivou., Sustainable industrial development is directly related to the creation of favorable conditions for the implementation of innovative activities. The main challenge in the field of innovation management is the selection and ranking of indicators that enable the creation of innovation, both at the state/region level (macro level) and at the enterprise level (micro level). This research was conducted for both levels separately. The ranking of indicators at the macro level was done for individual member states of EU, and for the EU as a unique region. For this purpose, the method of statistical learning was applied. At the micro level, a case study for ranking the indicators of innovation potential was done for the MSME sector in Serbia, using the method of a structured questionnaire and the method of multi-criteria analysis. The results of the research provide an opportunity to see the importance of individual indicators in the process of creation of innovation, both at the macro and micro levels.

In a Dutch auction, an item is offered for sale at a set maximum price. The price is then gradually lowered over a fixed interval of time until a bid is made, securing the item for the bidder at the current price. Bidders must trade-off between certainty and price: bid early to secure the item and you pay a premium; bid later at a lower price but risk losing to another bidder. These properties of Dutch auctions provide new opportunities to study competitive decision-making in a group setting. We developed a novel computerised Dutch auction platform and conducted a set of experiments manipulating volatility (fixed vs varied number of items for sale) and price reduction interval rate (step-rate). Triplets of participants ([Formula: see text]) competed with hypothetical funds against each other. We report null effects of step-rate and volatility on bidding behaviour. We developed a novel adaptation of prospect theory to account for group bidding behaviour by balancing certainty and subjective expected utility. We show the model is sensitive to variation in auction starting price and can predict the associated changes in group bid prices that were observed in our data.

The scope of this research encompasses issues associated with group decision making (GDM) as the most challenging process which entails various viewpoints and preferences of individuals that must be taken into consideration and somehow combined into one meaningful outcome. When GDM is taken into consideration, the AHP seems to be a particularly attractive methodology. From the perspective of its applications, an existing research gap has been identified and examined in this research paper. Thus, the inconsistency of judgments impact on priority vector quality has been examined from the perspective of group decision making. Examination results generalize to the synthesized pairwise comparison matrix that is obtained on the basis of individual pairwise comparison matrices for all group members. The examination process has proceeded with the application of Monte Carlo simulations coded and executed in Wolfram Mathematica Software. Having in mind that a consistency index for the PCM denoting group preferences cannot be greater than the consistency index of the most inconsistent individual PCM it became possible to designate the credibility of the priority vector for the group on the basis of the most inconsistent individual PCM. It is emphasized that thus far only a few papers have dealt with the problem concerning the relation between a level of the pairwise judgments inconsistency and the degree of possible estimation errors for established vector of priority ratios. This research paper overcomes limitations of other examinations which distinguishes it from other papers and emphasizes its novelty., Článek se věnuje problematice skupinového rozhodování (Group Decision Making) pomocí metody analytického hierarchického procesu (Analytic Hierarchy Process). Z pohledu aplikace uvedené metody rozhodování je zkoumán vliv konzistence rozhodování na důvěryhodnost prioritních poměrů (Priority Ratios) pro konkrétní prioritní vektor (Priority Vector), který je odvozený z nekonzistentních párových rozhodnutí. Výsledky jsou zobecněny pro navrženou matici párových porovnávací (Pairwise Comparison Matrix), která je navržena na základě individuálních matici párových porovnáncí všech členů skupinového rozhodování. Při ověření výsledků byla v softwaru Wolfram Mathematica použita simulace Monte Carlo.

Previous studies have shown that people can make adaptive in-ferences based on memory-based simple heuristics such asrecognition, fluency, or familiarity heuristic. In the presentstudy, we discussed the adaptive nature of memory-based sim-ple heuristics in a group decision making setting. In particular,we examined how the diversity of memory affected group de-cision making when group members were assumed to make in-ferences based on the familiarity heuristic. We predicted that,when the group members’ memories were diverse, group deci-sion making would become more accurate. To examine thisprediction, we conducted a behavioral experiment and com-puter simulations, and our results generally supported the pre-diction. We discuss the role of diverse memories in generatingadaptive group decision making.

In this article, we introduce a new paradigm to achieve Pareto optimality in group decision-making processes: bottom-up approaches to Pareto optimality. It is based on the idea that, while resolving a conflict in a group, individuals may trust some members more than others; thus, they may be willing to cooperate and share more information with those members. Therefore, one can divide the group into subgroups where more cooperative mechanisms can be formed to reach Pareto optimal outcomes. This is the first work that studies such use of a bottom-up approach to achieve Pareto optimality in conflict resolution in groups. First, we prove that an outcome that is Pareto optimal for subgroups is also Pareto optimal for the group as a whole. Then, we empirically analyze the appropriate conditions and achievable performance when applying bottom-up approaches under a wide variety of scenarios based on real-life datasets. The results show that bottom-up approaches are a viable mechanism to achieve Pareto optimality with applications to group decision-making, negotiation teams, and decision making in open environments.

In this article, we introduce a new paradigm to achieve Pareto optimality in group decision-making processes: bottom-up approaches to Pareto optimality. It is based on the idea that, while resolving a conflict in a group, individuals may trust some members more than others; thus, they may be willing to cooperate and share more information with those members. Therefore, one can divide the group into subgroups where more cooperative mechanisms can be formed to reach Pareto optimal outcomes. This is the first work that studies such use of a bottom-up approach to achieve Pareto optimality in conflict resolution in groups. First, we prove that an outcome that is Pareto optimal for subgroups is also Pareto optimal for the group as a whole. Then, we empirically analyze the appropriate conditions and achievable performance when applying bottom-up approaches under a wide variety of scenarios based on real-life datasets. The results show that bottom-up approaches are a viable mechanism to achieve Pareto optimality with applications to group decision-making, negotiation teams, and decision making in open environments., Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository ‘You share, we take care!’ – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public., Interactive Intelligence

Purpose – Investigate whether joint decision-making is distinct from individual decision-making in the case of biased sunk costs. Design/methodology/approach – We applied 96 questionnaires containing 5 questions adapted from Arkes and Blumer (1985) with undergraduate students. Individuals were considered in the individual mode, in pairs and in trios, totaling 190 participants. For data analysis, we used descriptive statistics, Chi-square test of adherence and Pearson's Chi-square test. Findings – When analyzing the opposite situation, five doubles and five triples presented biased behavior in all scenarios, whereas only two individuals had this same behavior. Originality/value – Individuals generally take little rational decisions when considering the expenses incurred in the past to make decisions in the present. However, making decisions individually or in groups may not be able to change this behavior., Objetivo – Investigar se a tomada de decisão em conjunto é distinta da tomada de decisão individual quando se trata do viés custos afundados. Metodologia – Foram aplicados 96 questionários contendo 5 questões adaptadas de Arkes e Blumer (1985) com alunos de graduação. Os indivíduos foram considerados no modo indivídual, em duplas e em trios, totalizando 190 participantes. Para análise dos dados, foi utilizado estatística descritiva, Teste do Qui-quadrado de aderência e Teste do Qui-quadrado de Pearson. Resultados – Cinco pessoas individualmente não apresentaram o viés em nenhum dos casos e, por outro lado, apenas um trio conseguiu tomar a decisão sem considerar os gastos incorridos. Ao analisar a situação oposta, cinco duplas e cinco trios apresentaram comportamentos enviesados em todos os cenários, enquanto apenas dois indivíduos tiveram esse mesmo comportamento. Contribuições – Os indivíduos, em geral, tomam decisões pouco racionais ao considerar os gastos incorridos no passado para tomar decisões no presente. No entanto, tomar decisões individualmente ou em grupo pode não ser capaz de alterar esse comportamento.

Purpose – Investigate whether joint decision-making is distinct from individual decision-making in the case of biased sunk costs. Design/methodology/approach – We applied 96 questionnaires containing 5 questions adapted from Arkes and Blumer (1985) with undergraduate students. Individuals were considered in the individual mode, in pairs and in trios, totaling 190 participants. For data analysis, we used descriptive statistics, Chi-square test of adherence and Pearson's Chi-square test. Findings – When analyzing the opposite situation, five doubles and five triples presented biased behavior in all scenarios, whereas only two individuals had this same behavior. Originality/value – Individuals generally take little rational decisions when considering the expenses incurred in the past to make decisions in the present. However, making decisions individually or in groups may not be able to change this behavior., Objetivo – Investigar se a tomada de decisão em conjunto é distinta da tomada de decisão individual quando se trata do viés custos afundados. Metodologia – Foram aplicados 96 questionários contendo 5 questões adaptadas de Arkes e Blumer (1985) com alunos de graduação. Os indivíduos foram considerados no modo indivídual, em duplas e em trios, totalizando 190 participantes. Para análise dos dados, foi utilizado estatística descritiva, Teste do Qui-quadrado de aderência e Teste do Qui-quadrado de Pearson. Resultados – Cinco pessoas individualmente não apresentaram o viés em nenhum dos casos e, por outro lado, apenas um trio conseguiu tomar a decisão sem considerar os gastos incorridos. Ao analisar a situação oposta, cinco duplas e cinco trios apresentaram comportamentos enviesados em todos os cenários, enquanto apenas dois indivíduos tiveram esse mesmo comportamento. Contribuições – Os indivíduos, em geral, tomam decisões pouco racionais ao considerar os gastos incorridos no passado para tomar decisões no presente. No entanto, tomar decisões individualmente ou em grupo pode não ser capaz de alterar esse comportamento.

Recent research has shown that mock jurors are sensitive to interrogation coerciveness and its relation to risk of false confessions in adults if they can see interrogation tactics used, but not if provided with a police report that omits these tactics (Kassin et al., 2017). The present study was designed to extend these findings to a juvenile confession case. The current study analyzed the effects of interrogation quality and type of evidence presented on mock jurors' perceptions of a juvenile confession. Participants (N= 602) read a case in which coerciveness (highly vs slightly), police report type (accurate vs inaccurate vs no report), and interrogation transcript presence (present vs. not present) were manipulated. Regardless of coercion level or accuracy, police report presence led to more guilty verdicts. Consistent with prior studies of adult interrogations, results indicate that reading a police report significantly diminishes mock jurors’ capacity to critically analyze juvenile confessions.

The method known as the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), a theoretical and methodological concept of multi-criteria analysis, is increasingly used in solving various decision-making problems. AHP is an excellent support to both the individual and group decision-making process, however, the involvement of a greater number of decision makers complicates the process and requires a different approach to when an individual decides alone. The synthesis of individual decisions within a group can be done in various ways, but the problem is how to deal with different levels of consistency when there are a number of decision makers. Thus, this paper presents some of the methods for defining the individual weights of decision makers in group AHP decision making.

In this article, we introduce a new paradigm to achieve Pareto optimality in group decision-making processes: bottom-up approaches to Pareto optimality. It is based on the idea that, while resolving a conflict in a group, individuals may trust some members more than others; thus, they may be willing to cooperate and share more information with those members. Therefore, one can divide the group into subgroups where more cooperative mechanisms can be formed to reach Pareto optimal outcomes. This is the first work that studies such use of a bottom-up approach to achieve Pareto optimality in conflict resolution in groups. First, we prove that an outcome that is Pareto optimal for subgroups is also Pareto optimal for the group as a whole. Then, we empirically analyze the appropriate conditions and achievable performance when applying bottom-up approaches under a wide variety of scenarios based on real-life datasets. The results show that bottom-up approaches are a viable mechanism to achieve Pareto optimality with applications to group decision-making, negotiation teams, and decision making in open environments.

In this article, we introduce a new paradigm to achieve Pareto optimality in group decision-making processes: bottom-up approaches to Pareto optimality. It is based on the idea that, while resolving a conflict in a group, individuals may trust some members more than others; thus, they may be willing to cooperate and share more information with those members. Therefore, one can divide the group into subgroups where more cooperative mechanisms can be formed to reach Pareto optimal outcomes. This is the first work that studies such use of a bottom-up approach to achieve Pareto optimality in conflict resolution in groups. First, we prove that an outcome that is Pareto optimal for subgroups is also Pareto optimal for the group as a whole. Then, we empirically analyze the appropriate conditions and achievable performance when applying bottom-up approaches under a wide variety of scenarios based on real-life datasets. The results show that bottom-up approaches are a viable mechanism to achieve Pareto optimality with applications to group decision-making, negotiation teams, and decision making in open environments., Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository ‘You share, we take care!’ – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public., Interactive Intelligence

Producción Científica, This paper introduces a new voting system in the setting of ordered qualitative scales. The process is conducted in a purely ordinal way by considering an ordinal proximity measure that assigns an ordinal degree of proximity to each pair of linguistic terms of the qualitative scale. Once the agents assess the alternatives through the qualitative scale, the alternatives are ranked according to the medians of the ordinal degrees of proximity between the obtained individual assessments and the highest linguistic term of the scale. Since some alternatives may share the same median, an appropriate tie-breaking procedure is introduced. Some properties of the proposed voting system have been provided., Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad (Project ECO2016-77900-P)

This paper reports upon the deliverables and learnings from a project within decision analysis for participatory planning and policy analysis on the municipal level. The project aimed to develop and utilize an online multicriteria decision analysis tool for evaluations of policy alternatives with respect to municipal commercial development policies, acknowledging the objectives and preferences from various local and national stakeholders. The tool itself relied solely on that the users supplied cardinal ranking statements in the appraisal of alternatives and in the ranking of criteria and the surrounding method has been used in three cases. In each case, several significant insights obtained in the decision-modelling workshops were emphasized by the participants. The better understanding of the general decision situation, preference structures, and possible strategies was highly appreciated. The perception was also that this enabled a better understanding of conflicting issues, even when these were not entirely resolved.

Producción Científica, This paper introduces a new voting system in the setting of ordered qualitative scales. The process is conducted in a purely ordinal way by considering an ordinal proximity measure that assigns an ordinal degree of proximity to each pair of linguistic terms of the qualitative scale. Once the agents assess the alternatives through the qualitative scale, the alternatives are ranked according to the medians of the ordinal degrees of proximity between the obtained individual assessments and the highest linguistic term of the scale. Since some alternatives may share the same median, an appropriate tie-breaking procedure is introduced. Some properties of the proposed voting system have been provided., Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad (Project ECO2016-77900-P)

This paper examines the concept, historical evolution and the different schools of thought regarding an aspect of one of the most productive and widely disseminated Operations Research disciplines of our time: Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). It analyses the development of the scientific method and new tendencies that have emerged in the context of the Knowledge Society. The work also considers future challenges in the field of MCDM, particularly in the context of one of the most popular approaches: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Three fundamental problems envisioned for this school of thought by its creator need to be addressed as future challenges in the MCDM field. This article is dedicated to the memory of Professor Thomas L. Saaty, the originator of AHP and one of the most brilliant and ingenious mathematicians of the last 60 years; he passed away in August 2017 at the age of 91., Este trabajo recoge brevemente el concepto, la evolución histórica y las diferentes escuelas de una de las partes de la Investigación Operativa más fructífera y con mayor difusión de los últimos 45 años: la Decisión Multicriterio. Así mismo, analiza la evolución que el método científico ha seguido en este periodo de tiempo y cuáles son las nuevas orientaciones que presenta en el contexto de la Sociedad del Conocimiento. Finalmente, se incluyen una serie de ideas sobre cuáles pueden ser algunos de los retos futuros en el campo de la toma de decisiones multicriterio (TDMC), en particular en el contexto de una de las aproximaciones más populares: el Proceso Analítico Jerárquico (AHP). Tres problemas fundamentales, ya vislumbrados para esta escuela de pensamiento por su creador, necesitan ser abordados como futuros retos en el campo multicriterio. Este trabajo se ha dedicado a la memoria del profesor Thomas L. Saaty, el autor de AHP y uno de los matemáticos más brillantes e ingeniosos de los últimos 60 años, quien acaba de fallecer en agosto de 2017 a los 91 años de edad.

Producción Científica, This paper introduces a new voting system in the setting of ordered qualitative scales. The process is conducted in a purely ordinal way by considering an ordinal proximity measure that assigns an ordinal degree of proximity to each pair of linguistic terms of the qualitative scale. Once the agents assess the alternatives through the qualitative scale, the alternatives are ranked according to the medians of the ordinal degrees of proximity between the obtained individual assessments and the highest linguistic term of the scale. Since some alternatives may share the same median, an appropriate tie-breaking procedure is introduced. Some properties of the proposed voting system have been provided., Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad (Project ECO2016-77900-P)

This paper examines the concept, historical evolution and the different schools of thought regarding an aspect of one of the most productive and widely disseminated Operations Research disciplines of our time: Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). It analyses the development of the scientific method and new tendencies that have emerged in the context of the Knowledge Society. The work also considers future challenges in the field of MCDM, particularly in the context of one of the most popular approaches: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Three fundamental problems envisioned for this school of thought by its creator need to be addressed as future challenges in the MCDM field. This article is dedicated to the memory of Professor Thomas L. Saaty, the originator of AHP and one of the most brilliant and ingenious mathematicians of the last 60 years; he passed away in August 2017 at the age of 91., Este trabajo recoge brevemente el concepto, la evolución histórica y las diferentes escuelas de una de las partes de la Investigación Operativa más fructífera y con mayor difusión de los últimos 45 años: la Decisión Multicriterio. Así mismo, analiza la evolución que el método científico ha seguido en este periodo de tiempo y cuáles son las nuevas orientaciones que presenta en el contexto de la Sociedad del Conocimiento. Finalmente, se incluyen una serie de ideas sobre cuáles pueden ser algunos de los retos futuros en el campo de la toma de decisiones multicriterio (TDMC), en particular en el contexto de una de las aproximaciones más populares: el Proceso Analítico Jerárquico (AHP). Tres problemas fundamentales, ya vislumbrados para esta escuela de pensamiento por su creador, necesitan ser abordados como futuros retos en el campo multicriterio. Este trabajo se ha dedicado a la memoria del profesor Thomas L. Saaty, el autor de AHP y uno de los matemáticos más brillantes e ingeniosos de los últimos 60 años, quien acaba de fallecer en agosto de 2017 a los 91 años de edad.

Present measures of the degree of agreement in group decision-making using hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets allow consensus or agreement measurement when decision makers’ assessments involve hesitance. Yet they do not discriminate with different degrees of consensus among situations with discordant or polarized assessments. The visualization of differences among groups for which there is no agreement but different possible levels of disagreement is an important issue in collective decision-making situations. In this paper, we propose new collective and individual consensus measures that explicitly consider the hesitance of the decision makers’ hesitance in giving an opinion and also the gap between non-overlapping assessments, thus allowing the measurement of the polarization present within the group's opinions. In addition, an expert's profile is defined by considering the expert's behavior in previous assessments in group decision-making processes in terms of precision and dissension., Peer Reviewed, Postprint (author's final draft)

Producción Científica, This paper introduces a new voting system in the setting of ordered qualitative scales. The process is conducted in a purely ordinal way by considering an ordinal proximity measure that assigns an ordinal degree of proximity to each pair of linguistic terms of the qualitative scale. Once the agents assess the alternatives through the qualitative scale, the alternatives are ranked according to the medians of the ordinal degrees of proximity between the obtained individual assessments and the highest linguistic term of the scale. Since some alternatives may share the same median, an appropriate tie-breaking procedure is introduced. Some properties of the proposed voting system have been provided., Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad (Project ECO2016-77900-P)

This paper reports upon the deliverables and learnings from a project within decision analysis for participatory planning and policy analysis on the municipal level. The project aimed to develop and utilize an online multicriteria decision analysis tool for evaluations of policy alternatives with respect to municipal commercial development policies, acknowledging the objectives and preferences from various local and national stakeholders. The tool itself relied solely on that the users supplied cardinal ranking statements in the appraisal of alternatives and in the ranking of criteria and the surrounding method has been used in three cases. In each case, several significant insights obtained in the decision-modelling workshops were emphasized by the participants. The better understanding of the general decision situation, preference structures, and possible strategies was highly appreciated. The perception was also that this enabled a better understanding of conflicting issues, even when these were not entirely resolved., First published: 10 April 2018

The three-door problem is an example of a systematic violation of a key rationality postulate that has attracted much attention. In this seemingly simple individual decision task, most people initially fail to apply correctly Bayes’ Law, and to make the payoff-maximizing choice. Previous experimental studies have shown that individual learning reduces the incidence of irrational choices somewhat, but is far from eliminating it. We experimentally study the roles of communication and competition as institutions to mitigate the choice anomaly. We show that the three-door anomaly can be entirely eliminated by these institutions.

原著

BACKGROUND: The judgment and decision making process during guideline development is central for producing high-quality clinical practice guidelines, but the topic is relatively underexplored in the guideline research literature. We have studied the development process of national guidelines with a disease-prevention scope produced by the National board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) in Sweden. The NBHW formal guideline development model states that guideline recommendations should be based on five decision-criteria: research evidence; curative/preventive effect size, severity of the condition; cost-effectiveness; and ethical considerations. A group of health profession representatives (i.e. a prioritization group) was assigned the task of ranking condition-intervention pairs for guideline recommendations, taking into consideration the multiple decision criteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the decision making process during the two-year development of national guidelines for methods of preventing disease. METHODS: A qualitative inductive longitudinal case study approach was used to investigate the decision making process. Questionnaires, non-participant observations of nine two-day group meetings, and documents provided data for the analysis. Conventional and summative qualitative content analysis was used to analyse data. RESULTS: The guideline development model was modified ad-hoc as the group encountered three main types of dilemmas: high quality evidence vs. low adoptability of recommendation; insufficient evidence vs. high urgency to act; and incoherence in assessment and prioritization within and between four different lifestyle areas. The formal guideline development model guided the decision-criteria used, but three new or revised criteria were added by the group: 'clinical knowledge and experience', 'potential guideline consequences' and 'needs of vulnerable groups'. The frequency of the use of various criteria in discussions varied over time. G

BACKGROUND: The judgment and decision making process during guideline development is central for producing high-quality clinical practice guidelines, but the topic is relatively underexplored in the guideline research literature. We have studied the development process of national guidelines with a disease-prevention scope produced by the National board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) in Sweden. The NBHW formal guideline development model states that guideline recommendations should be based on five decision-criteria: research evidence; curative/preventive effect size, severity of the condition; cost-effectiveness; and ethical considerations. A group of health profession representatives (i.e. a prioritization group) was assigned the task of ranking condition-intervention pairs for guideline recommendations, taking into consideration the multiple decision criteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the decision making process during the two-year development of national guidelines for methods of preventing disease. METHODS: A qualitative inductive longitudinal case study approach was used to investigate the decision making process. Questionnaires, non-participant observations of nine two-day group meetings, and documents provided data for the analysis. Conventional and summative qualitative content analysis was used to analyse data. RESULTS: The guideline development model was modified ad-hoc as the group encountered three main types of dilemmas: high quality evidence vs. low adoptability of recommendation; insufficient evidence vs. high urgency to act; and incoherence in assessment and prioritization within and between four different lifestyle areas. The formal guideline development model guided the decision-criteria used, but three new or revised criteria were added by the group: 'clinical knowledge and experience', 'potential guideline consequences' and 'needs of vulnerable groups'. The frequency of the use of various criteria in discussions varied over time. G

Men and women becoming parents are supposed to have equal opportunities in working life. However, inequality and discrimination are not easily avoided. The aim of this study was to investigate how argumentation related to parenthood and careers takes form in group discussions of a fictional recruitment situation, and how stereotypes such as competence and warmth are manifested in such discussions. Thirty-five ad-hoc groups of university students were asked to make a choice between three candidates for a consultancy position. The first two candidates were a man and a woman, while the third alternately was described either as a man or a woman described as having a newborn child. Parenthood was sometimes seen as reducing competence, but it was more often viewed as adding to competence. Parenthood was also considered to add warmth to the organization. Interestingly, all groups avoided relating the parenthood issue to gender. Three conversation patterns were found, differing in the amount of elaboration of the topic of parenthood and work. It was concluded that the most elaborated kind seems to foster a situation where implicit norms are made visible more easily.

BACKGROUND: The judgment and decision making process during guideline development is central for producing high-quality clinical practice guidelines, but the topic is relatively underexplored in the guideline research literature. We have studied the development process of national guidelines with a disease-prevention scope produced by the National board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) in Sweden. The NBHW formal guideline development model states that guideline recommendations should be based on five decision-criteria: research evidence; curative/preventive effect size, severity of the condition; cost-effectiveness; and ethical considerations. A group of health profession representatives (i.e. a prioritization group) was assigned the task of ranking condition-intervention pairs for guideline recommendations, taking into consideration the multiple decision criteria. The aim of this study was to investigate the decision making process during the two-year development of national guidelines for methods of preventing disease. METHODS: A qualitative inductive longitudinal case study approach was used to investigate the decision making process. Questionnaires, non-participant observations of nine two-day group meetings, and documents provided data for the analysis. Conventional and summative qualitative content analysis was used to analyse data. RESULTS: The guideline development model was modified ad-hoc as the group encountered three main types of dilemmas: high quality evidence vs. low adoptability of recommendation; insufficient evidence vs. high urgency to act; and incoherence in assessment and prioritization within and between four different lifestyle areas. The formal guideline development model guided the decision-criteria used, but three new or revised criteria were added by the group: 'clinical knowledge and experience', 'potential guideline consequences' and 'needs of vulnerable groups'. The frequency of the use of various criteria in discussions varied over time. G

Men and women becoming parents are supposed to have equal opportunities in working life. However, inequality and discrimination are not easily avoided. The aim of this study was to investigate how argumentation related to parenthood and careers takes form in group discussions of a fictional recruitment situation, and how stereotypes such as competence and warmth are manifested in such discussions. Thirty-five ad-hoc groups of university students were asked to make a choice between three candidates for a consultancy position. The first two candidates were a man and a woman, while the third alternately was described either as a man or a woman described as having a newborn child. Parenthood was sometimes seen as reducing competence, but it was more often viewed as adding to competence. Parenthood was also considered to add warmth to the organization. Interestingly, all groups avoided relating the parenthood issue to gender. Three conversation patterns were found, differing in the amount of elaboration of the topic of parenthood and work. It was concluded that the most elaborated kind seems to foster a situation where implicit norms are made visible more easily.