Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Group Decision Making and Consensual Processes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Large Group Decision Making

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Computer Science ((BRIEFSCOMPUTER))

Abstract

This chapter introduces the basic concepts and ideas behind Group Decision Making (GDM) problems under uncertainty, highlighting its core underlying processes—aggregation of information and alternative(s) selection—and preference modeling approaches. Consensus building principles and its numerous related approaches to support accepted group decisions are then introduced in detail. Finally, given the frequent co-occurrence of decision scenarios involving both groups of participants and multiple evaluation criteria, the chapter concludes with an overview of classic Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Change history

  • 28 December 2018

    This book was inadvertently published with wrong author names in Chaps. 2 and 4. Iván Palomares Carrascosa has now been rightly addressed as the author in these chapters and the research scholars have been acknowledged in the front matter.

Notes

  1. 1.

    In Saaty’s multiplicative scale, a value of 1 indicates indifference and the closer the integer value is to 9 the more strongly x l is preferred against x k, see Table 2.1 in Sect. 2.5.

  2. 2.

    Existing linguistic decision making approaches tend to adopt two opposite notions of granularity: (1) odd granularity equal to cardinality of the term set, g = |S|; or (2) even granularity equal to g = |S|− 1.

  3. 3.

    Cambridge English Dictionary.

References

  1. Atanassov, K.T.: Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20(1), pp. 87–96, 1986.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. M. Behzadian, S.K. Otaghsara, M. Yazdani, J. Ignatius.: A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, pp. 13051–13069, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Beliakov, G., Pradera, A., Calvo, T.: Aggregation functions: a guide for practitioners. Springer Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing (reprint), Springer, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bellman, R.E., Zadeh, L.A.: Decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Management Science, 17(4), pp. 141–164, 1970.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Ben-Arieh, D., Chen. Z.: Linguistic labels aggregation and consensus measure for autocratic decision-making using group recommendations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, 36(1), pp. 558–568, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ben-Arieh, D., Chen, Z.: Linguistic group decision-making: opinion aggregation and measures of consensus. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 5(4), pp. 371–386, 2006.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Bordogna, G., Fedrizzi, M., Pasi, G.: A linguistic modeling of consensus in group decision making based on OWA operators. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 27(1), pp. 126–133, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bryson, N.: Group decision-making and the analytic hierarchy process. exploring the consensus-relevant information content. Computers and Operations Research, 23(1), pp. 27–35, 1996.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Bouyssou, D., Dubois, D., Prade, H., Pirlot, M. (Eds.): Decision making process: concepts and methods. Wiley-ISTE, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Butler, C.T.L., Rothstein, A.: On conflict and consensus: A handbook on formal consensus decision making. Food Not Bombs Publishing (Takoma Park), 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Campanella, G., Ribeiro, R.: A framework for dynamic multiple-criteria decision making. Decision Support Systems, 52, pp. 52–60, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Carlsson, C., Ehrenberg, D., Eklund, P., Fedrizzi, M., Gustafsson, P., Lindholm, P., Merkuryeva, G., Riissanen, T., Ventre, A.G.S.: Consensus in distributed soft environments. European Journal of Operational Research, 61(1–2), pp. 165–185, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen, J.L., Chen, C., Wang, C.C., Jiang, X.: Measuring soft consensus in uncertain linguistic group decision-making based on deviation and overlap degrees. International Journal of Innovative Management, Information & Production, 2(3), pp. 25–33, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Choo, E.U., William C.W.: A common framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices. Computers & Operations Research, 31(6), pp. 893–908, 2004.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Choudhury, A.K., Shankar, R., Tiwari, M.K.: Consensus-based intelligent group decision-making model for the selection of advanced technology. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), pp. 1776–1799, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dong, Y., Xu, J.: Consensus building in group decision making - searching the consensus path with minimum adjustments. Springer, 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Dong, Y., Zhang, H., Herrera-Viedma, E.: Integrating experts’ weights generated dynamically into the consensus reaching process and its applications in managing non-cooperative behaviors. Decision Support Systems, 84, pp. 1–15, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dong, Y., Zhao, S., Zhang, H., Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E.: A self-management mechanism for non-cooperative behaviors in large-scale group consensus reaching processes. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, In press. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2818078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Doumpos, M., Zopounidis, C.: Multicriteria Decision Aid Classification Methods. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Dymova, L, Savastjanov, P., Tikhonenko, A.: A direct interval extension of TOPSIS method. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, pp. 4841–4847, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. García-Alcaraz, J.L., Martínez-Loya, V., Díaz-Reza, R., Avelar, L., Canales, I.: A multicriteria decision support system framework for computer selection. In R. Valencia-García et al. (Eds.): Exploring Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Studies in Computational Intelligence, 764, pp. 89–110, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gong, Z.W., Forrest, J., Yang, Y.J.: The optimal group consensus models for 2-tuple linguistic preference relations. Knowledge-based systems, 37, pp. 427–437, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. González-Artega, T., de Andrés, R., Chiclana, F.: A new measure of consensus with reciprocal preference relations. Knowledge-based Systems, 107(C), pp. 104–116, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hansson, S.O.: Decision Theory: A brief introduction. Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Verdegay, J.L.: Direct approach processes in group decision making using linguistic OWA operators. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 79(2), pp. 175–190, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Verdegay, J.L.: A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 78(1), pp. 73–87, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Verdegay, J.L.: Linguistic measures based on fuzzy coincidence for reaching consensus in group decision making. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 16(3–4), pp. 309–334, 1997.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Verdegay, J.L.: A rational consensus model in group decision making using linguistic assessments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 88(1), pp. 31–49, 1997.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F.: A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, 32(3), pp. 394–402, 2002.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., Chiclana, F., Herrera, F.: A consensus model for group decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 15(5), pp. 863–877, 2007.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Herrera-Viedma, E., García-Lapresta, J.L., Kacprzyk, J., Fedrizzi, M., Nurmi, H., Zadrozny, S. (Eds.): Consensual Processes. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 267, Springer, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hirano, K.: Decision Theory in Econometrics. In: Durlauf S.N., Blume L.E. (eds) Microeconometrics. The New Palgrave Economics Collection. Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hwang, C. L., Yoon, K. P.: Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. New York, Springer-Verlag, 1981.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Ishizaka, A., Markus L.: How to derive priorities in AHP: a comparative study. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 14(4), pp. 387–400, 2006.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Kacprzyk, J.: Group decision making with a fuzzy linguistic majority. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 18(2), pp. 105–118, 1986.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Kacprzyk, J.: On some fuzzy cores and ‘soft’ consensus measures in group decision making. In J. Bezdek (Ed.), The Analysis of Fuzzy Information, pp. 119–130, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kacprzyk, J., Fedrizzi, M.: A “soft” measure of consensus in the setting of partial (fuzzy) preferences. European Journal of Operational Research, 34(1), pp. 316–325, 1988.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Kacprzyk, J., Fedrizzi, M., Nurmi, H.: Group decision making and consensus under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 49(1), pp. 21–31, 1992.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Kacprzyk, J., Zadrozny, S.: Soft computing and web intelligence for supporting consensus reaching. Soft Computing, 14(8), pp. 833–846, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kline, J.A.: Orientation and group consensus. Central States Speech Journal, 23, pp. 44–47, 1972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Khorshid, S.: Soft consensus model based on coincidence between positive and negative ideal degrees of agreement under a group decision-making fuzzy environment. Experts systems with applications, 37(5), pp. 3977–3985, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Lai, S.K.: A preference-based interpretation of AHP. Omega, 23, pp. 453–462, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lin, C.-C.: A revised framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices. European Journal of Operational Research, 176 (2), pp. 1145–1150, 2007.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Liu, B., Shen, Y., Chen, X., Sun, H., Chen, Y.: A complex multi-attribute large-group PLS decision-making method in the interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38, pp. 4512–4527, 2014.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Liu, Y., Liang, C., Chiclana, F., Wu, J.: A trust induced recommendation mechanism for reaching consensus in group decision making. Knowledge-based Systems, 119, pp. 221–231, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lu, J., Zhang, G., Ruan, D., Wu, F.: Multi-objective group decision making - methods, software and applications with fuzzy set techniques. World Scientific Series in Electrical and Computer Engineering, 6, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Martinez, L., Montero, J.: Challenges for improving consensus reaching process in collective decisions. New Mathematics and Natural Computation, 3(2), pp. 203–217, 2007.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Martinez, L, Herrera, F.: An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making: Extensions, applications and challenges. Information Sciences, 207, pp. 1–18, 2012.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  49. Mata, F., Martinez, L., Herrera-Viedma, E.: An adaptive consensus support model for group decision-making problems in a multigranular fuzzy linguistic context. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 17(2), pp. 279–290, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Mendel, J., John, R.I.B.: Type-2 Fuzzy Sets made Simple. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 10(2), pp. 117–127, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Orlovsky, S.: Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(3), 155–167.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. Palomares, I., Sánchez, P., Quesada, F., Mata, F., Martínez, L.: COMAS - A multi-agent system for performing consensus processes. In Abraham, A. et al. (Eds.): Procs. International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence (DCAI 2011). Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, 91, pp. 125–132, Springer, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Palomares, I., Liu, J., Xu, Y., Martínez, L.: Modelling experts’ attitudes in group decision making. Soft Computing, 16(10), pp. 1755–1766, 2012.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Palomares, I., Estrella, F.J., Martinez, L., Herrera, F.: Consensus under a fuzzy context - taxonomy, analysis framework AFRYCA and experimental case of study. Information fusion, 20, pp. 252–271, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Palomares, I., Martinez, L.: A semisupervised multiagent system model to support consensus-reaching processes. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 22(4), pp. 762–777, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Palomares, I., Martínez, L., Herrera, F.: A consensus model to detect and manage non-cooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 22(3), pp. 516–530, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Palomares, I.: Multi-agent System to model consensus processes in large-scale group decision making using soft computing techniques. PhD Thesis, University of Jaén (Spain), 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Quesada, F., Palomares, I., Martínez, L.: Managing experts behavior in large-scale consensus reaching processes with uninorm aggregation operators. Applied Soft Computing, 35, pp. 873–887, 2015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Palomares, I., Sellak, H., Ouhbi, B., Frikh, B.: Adaptive, Semi-Supervised Consensus Model for Multi-Criteria Large Group Decision Making in a Linguistic Setting. In ISKE 2017 Proceedings: 12th International Conference on Intelligent Systems and Knowledge Engineering, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Parreiras, R.O., Ekel, P., Bernardes, A.: A dynamic consensus scheme based on a nonreciprocal fuzzy preference relation modeling. Information Sciences, 211(1), pp. 1–17, 2012.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  61. Parreiras, R.O., Ekel, P., Bernardes, A.: A dynamic consensus scheme based on a nonreciprocal fuzzy preference relation modeling. Information Sciences, 211(1), pp. 1–17, 2012.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  62. Peterson, M.: An Introduction to Decision Theory (Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy). Cambridge University Press, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Roubens, M.: Fuzzy sets and decision analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 90(2), pp. 199–206, 1997.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Russo, R.D.F.S.M., Camanho, R.: Criteria in AHP: A systematic review of literature. Procedia Computer Science, pp. 1123–1132, Elsevier, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Saaty, T.L.: Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 74, pp. 426–447, 1994.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  66. Saaty, Thomas L. “The Analytical Hierarchy Process, Planning, Priority.” Resource Allocation. RWS Publications, USA (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Saaty, Thomas L. “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process.” International journal of services sciences 1.1 (2008): 83–98.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  68. Saint, S., Lawson, J.R.: Rules for reaching consensus. A modern approach to decision making. Jossey-Bass, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Spillman, B., Bezdek, J., Spillman, R.: Development of an instrument for the dynamic measurement of consensus. Communication Monographs, 46(1), pp. 1–12, 1979.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  70. Sorin, N., Dzitac, S., Dzitax, I.: Fuzzy TOPSIS: a general view. Procedia Computer Science, pp. 823–831, Elsevier, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Tanino, T.: Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 12(2), pp. 117–131, 1984.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  72. Tocqueville, A.: Democracy in America (2nd Ed.). Saunders and Otley (London), 1840.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Torra, V.: Hesitant Fuzzy Sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 25(6), pp. 529–539, 2010.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  74. Torra, V., Mesiar, R., Baets, B.: Aggregation functions in theory and practice. Springer Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (Proceedings AGOP 2017), Springer, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Wu, Z., Xu, J.: A consistency and consensus based decision support model for group decision making with multiplicative preference relations. Decision Support Systems, 52(3), pp. 757–767, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Wu, J., Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E.: Trust based consensus model for social network in an incomplete linguistic information context. Applied Soft Computing, 35, pp. 827–839, 2015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Xia, M., Xu, Z., Chen, J.: Algorithms for improving consistency or consensus of reciprocal [0,1]-valued preference relations. Fuzzy sets and systems, 216(Spec. Iss.), pp. 108–133, 2013.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  78. Xia, M., Xu, Z., Chen, N.: Some Hesitant Fuzzy Aggregation Operators with Their Application in Group Decision Making. Group Decision and Negotiation. 22(2), pp. 259–279, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Xu, Z.: An automatic approach to reaching consensus in multiple attribute group decision making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 56(4), pp. 1369–1374, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Yager, R.: On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. 18(1), pp. 183–190, 1988.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  81. Yager, R., Rybalov, A.: Uninorm aggregation operators. Fuzzy Sets and Systems. 80, pp. 111–120, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. Yager, R., Filev, D.: Induced Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 29, pp. 141–150, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Yager, R.: Penalizing strategic preference manipulation in multi-agent decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 9(3), pp. 393–403, 2001.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  84. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), pp. 338–353. 1965.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  85. Zadeh, L.A.: The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning - I. Information Sciences, 8(3), pp. 199–249, 1975.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  86. Zadeh, L.A.: The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning - II. Information Sciences, 9(1), pp. 43–80, 1975.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  87. Zadeh, L.A.: A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages. Computing and Mathematics with Applications, 9(1), pp. 149–184, 1983.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  88. Zeleny, M.: A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Computers & Operations Research, 1(3–4), pp. 379–396, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Zhang, G., Dong, Y., Xu, Y., Li, H.: Minimum-cost consensus models under aggregation operators. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 41(6), pp. 1253–1261, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Zulueta, Y., Martínez-Moreno, J., Bello, R., Martínez, L.: A discrete time variable index for supporting dynamic multi-criteria decision making, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems. 22, pp. 1–22, 2014.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science (SCEEM), University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    Iván Palomares Carrascosa

Authors
  1. Iván Palomares Carrascosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Palomares Carrascosa, I. (2018). Group Decision Making and Consensual Processes. In: Large Group Decision Making. SpringerBriefs in Computer Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01027-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01027-0_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01026-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01027-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation