Search

The Negotiation Support Systems often implement multiple criteria decision aiding (MCDA) techniques for building a negotiation scoring system. Those formal models should meet the needs, motivations, expectations, and cognitive abilities of users. In this paper, we try to explore the effects of decision maker's subjective perception of ease of use, time requirements, interface, preference representation, and efficiency of a particular MCDA method on the choice regarding the future use of this method. The multinomial logistic regression model is built and analysed. The analysis is based on data from online decision making experiments, where three MCDA methods were implemented, i.e. AHP, SMART, and TOPSIS. The study provides several interesting findings, concerning the behavioural aspects of multiple criteria decision aiding in software support systems. Most of the users recommended TOPSIS as the best one for supporting decisions in the future. This is a fast technique, for which we used an attractive graphical interface, suggesting that these factors play a crucial role in the users' choices. However, the causative regression model showed that the user's positive experience in using a particular method, i.e. its effectiveness in solving an exemplary numerical case, has the highest impact on the method's choice for future use. The second most important factor is the adequacy in representing the user's preferences by this method. We show, however, that the strengths of effects and their significance may vary across the methods. Understanding the decision maker's evaluations of the MCDA techniques may help build a cognitive negotiation support system that satisfies the user's expectations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Research Papers of the Wroclaw University of Economics / Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wroclawiu is the property of Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wroclawiu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Research Papers of the Wroclaw University of Economics / Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wroclawiu is the property of Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wroclawiu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Research Papers of the Wroclaw University of Economics / Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wroclawiu is the property of Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wroclawiu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Scoring the negotiation template and building a scoring system for negotiation offers is a starting point for analysis of negotiation. It is usually done by means of a classical additive scoring model. Recent research confirms, however, that TOPSIS may be a good alternative to SAW-based models, since it significantly facilitates the processes of template definition and elicitation of negotiator's preferences. Fundamental ideas of the TOPSIS, VIKOR and BIPOLAR methods have been analysed and attempts were made to hybridize some of their notions to propose an alternative method for evaluating negotiation offers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]