Gaining consensus in a moderated group: A model with a twofold feedback mechanism

Dong, Qingxing; Zhu, K.; Cooper, Orrin

doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.11.020

Cited by 29 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A consensus-reaching process (CRP) can reduce the dissensions in MCGDM problems through experts discussing and modifying their evaluation information to avoid conflict and obtain a common solution [ 40 , 41 ]. It is an important part of SN-MCGDM to improve the group consensus level.…”

Section: Hesitant Probabilistic Fuzzy Trust (Hpft) Social Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Fuzzy-Social Network Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Framework for Selection of Renewable Energy Project: A Case of China

Zhang

Zeng

et al. 2021

Int. J. Fuzzy Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Hesitant Probabilistic Fuzzy Trust (Hpft) Social Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Fuzzy-Social Network Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Framework for Selection of Renewable Energy Project: A Case of China

Zhang

Zeng

et al. 2021

Int. J. Fuzzy Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A solution with a high level of consensus is desirable. Many researchers focus on how to define acceptable level of consensus and, in turn, how to achieve it (Moreno-Jimenez et al, 2008;Alonso et al, 2010;Bezerra et al, 2014;Blagoje-vic et al, 2016b;Brandt et al, 2017;Dong et al, 2017). Beside methods proposed in given literature, there are also other formal mathematical methods for reaching the consensus, such as consensus convergence modeling or central tendency methods (middle "value" is measured using the mean, median, or mode).…”

Section: Consensus In Group Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflicts and resolutions in managing water allocation at the watershed scale

Srdjević

Melo

et al. 2019

Die Bodenkultur: Journal of Land Management, Food and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Multiple runs of a river basin model produced information about water allocation under different users’ priorities, creating a set of allocation scenarios as possible decision alternatives. To identify the most desired scenario that will, expectedly, be more readily accepted and implemented, involvement of stakeholders and reaching the consensus among them in evaluating scenarios are essential. This article describes methodology for integrating multi-criteria optimization as an efficient tool for the evaluation of scenarios in a group context, with river basin simulation-optimization models. Methodology was developed within the scope of the bilateral project Serbia–Portugal, and it consisted of five phases: defining the preference schemes of allocation, running the ACQUANET model, evaluating the criteria and strategies with analytic hierarchy process, aggregation and initial search for consensus in subgroups, and obtaining the final consensus converged result (best management strategy). The approach was tested on the water allocation problem in the Nadela watershed in Vojvodina Province in Serbia, with participation of 23 stakeholders. Promising results recommended the approach for the testing in different conditions in the area near Bragança in northeast Portugal (Sabor watershed).

show abstract

“…Therefore, one of the most important issues in reaching consensus regards how to select the appropriate threshold value in order to meet the different demands of multiple GDM organizations. In the aforementioned existent feedback mechanisms, a fixed consensus threshold value γ to measure the level of group consensus is usually assumed based on the moderator's experience and knowledge [23]- [27]. Neither the feedback process number of inconsistent experts nor their associated adjustment cost can be known before the consensus threshold is determined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Dynamic Feedback Mechanism With Attitudinal Consensus Threshold for Minimum Adjustment Cost in Group Decision Making

Sun

Chiclana

et al. 2022

IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a theoretical framework for a dynamic feedback mechanism in group decision making (GDM) by the implementation of an attitudinal consensus threshold (ACT) to generate recommendation advice for the identified inconsistent experts with the aim to increase consensus. The novelty of the approach resides in its ability to implement the ACT continuously, which allows the covering of all possible consensus states of the group from its minimum to maximum consensus degrees. Therefore, it can be flexibly applied to GDM problems with different consistency requirements. A sensitivity analysis method with visual simulation is proposed to support the checking of the numbers of experts involved in the feedback process and the minimum adjustment cost associated with the different ACT intervals. Experimental results show that an increase in the ACT value will lead to an increase in the number of experts and adjustment cost involved in the feedback process. Eventually, a numerical example is included to simulate the feedback process under various decision making scenarios with different ACT intervals.

show abstract

Gaining consensus in a moderated group: A model with a twofold feedback mechanism

Cited by 29 publications

References 49 publications

A Fuzzy-Social Network Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Framework for Selection of Renewable Energy Project: A Case of China

A Fuzzy-Social Network Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Framework for Selection of Renewable Energy Project: A Case of China

Conflicts and resolutions in managing water allocation at the watershed scale

A Dynamic Feedback Mechanism With Attitudinal Consensus Threshold for Minimum Adjustment Cost in Group Decision Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About