Abstract
Supporting group decision-making when the decision-makers are spread around the world is a complex process. The mechanisms of automated negotiation, such as argumentation, can be used in Ubiquitous Group Decision Support Systems to help decision-makers find a solution based on their preferences. However, there are some other important issues that affect the decision-making process beyond typical preferences over criteria and alternatives. In this paper, we propose an algorithm that will allow agents to reason about self-expertise and other decision makers’ credibility. This way, we intend agents to achieve better quality and more consensual decisions. Our algorithm includes not only the decision-maker’s preferences but also his intentions in the process. By using the proposed model, agents achieved a stronger consensus in all scenarios that were considered and higher satisfaction levels in the most complex scenarios.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Luthans, F.: Organizational Behavior, vol. 46, pp. 594. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston (2011)
DeSanctis, G., Gallupe, B.: Group decision support systems: a new frontier. SIGMIS Database 16, 3–10 (1985)
DeSanctis, G., Gallupe, B.: A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Manage. Sci. 33, 589–609 (1987)
Grudin, J.: Group dynamics and ubiquitous computing. Commun. ACM 45, 74–78 (2002)
Marreiros, G., Santos, R., Ramos, C., Neves, J.: Context-aware emotion-based model for group decision making. Intell. Syst. IEEE 25, 31–39 (2010)
Kwon, O., Yoo, K., Suh, E.: UbiDSS: a proactive intelligent decision support system as an expert system deploying ubiquitous computing technologies. Expert Syst. Appl. 28, 149–161 (2005)
Cramton, C.D.: The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organ. Sci. 12, 346–371 (2001)
Dennis, A.R.: Information exchange and use in group decision making: you can lead a group to information, but you can’t make it think. MIS Q. 20, 433–457 (1996)
Hill, G.W.: Group versus individual performance: are N+1 heads better than one? Psychol. Bull. 91, 517 (1982)
Watson, W.E., Michaelsen, L.K., Sharp, W.: Member competence, group interaction, and group decision making: a longitudinal study. J. Appl. Psychol. 76, 803 (1991)
Hackman, J.R., Morris, C.G.: Group Tasks, Group Interaction Process, and Group Performance Effectiveness: A Review and Proposed Integration. Citeseer (1974)
Lamm, H., Trommsdorff, G.: Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): a review. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 3, 361–388 (1973)
Osborn, A.F.: Applied Imagination; Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem-solving: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem-solving. Scribner, New York (1963)
Bottger, P.C., Yetton, P.W.: An integration of process and decision scheme explanations of group problem solving performance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 42, 234–249 (1988)
Einhorn, H.J., Hogarth, R.M., Klempner, E.: Quality of group judgment. Psychol. Bull. 84, 158 (1977)
McGrath, J.E.: Groups: Interaction and Performance. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1984)
Steiner, I.D.: Group Process and Productivity (Social Psychological Monograph) (2007)
Bonner, B.L., Baumann, M.R., Dalal, R.S.: The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and performance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 88, 719–736 (2002)
Bonaccio, S., Dalal, R.S.: Advice taking and decision-making: an integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 101, 127–151 (2006)
Kameda, T., Tindale, R.S., Davis, J.H.: 14 cognitions, preferences, and social sharedness: past, present, and future directions in group decision making. Emer. Perspect. Judgment Decis. Res. 458 (2003)
Carneiro, J., Martinho, D., Marreiros, G., Novais, P.: A general template to configure multi-criteria problems in ubiquitous GDSS. Intl. J. Softw. Eng. Appl. 9, 193–206 (2015)
Martinho, D., Carneiro, J., Marreiros, G., Novais, P.: Dealing with agents’ behaviour in the decision-making process. In: Workshop Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, p. 4. IOS Press (2015)
Flanagin, A.J., Metzger, M.J.: Digital media and youth: unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility. In: Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility, pp. 5–27 (2008)
Carneiro, J., Marreiros, G., Novais, P.: Using satisfaction analysis to predict decision quality. Intl. J. Artif. Intell.™ 13, 45–57 (2015)
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by COMPETE Programme (operational programme for competitiveness) within Project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007043, by National Funds through the FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) within the Projects UID/CEC/00319/2013, UID/EEA/00760/2013, and the João Carneiro PhD Grant with the Reference SFRH/BD/89697/2012.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Carneiro, J., Martinho, D., Marreiros, G., Novais, P. (2017). Including Credibility and Expertise in Group Decision-Making Process: An Approach Designed for UbiGDSS. In: Rocha, Á., Correia, A., Adeli, H., Reis, L., Costanzo, S. (eds) Recent Advances in Information Systems and Technologies. WorldCIST 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 570. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56538-5_42
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56538-5_42
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56537-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56538-5
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)