IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v10y2013i2p103-120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Foundations for Group Decision Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ralph L. Keeney

    (Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

Abstract

This paper derives a general prescriptive model for group decision analysis based on a set of logical and operational assumptions analogous to those for individual decision analysis. The approach accounts for each group member's potentially different frames of their common decision, including different events and different consequences of concern. Assuming that each group member accepts the decision analysis assumptions to evaluate his or her analysis of what the group should do and that the group accepts an analogous set of decision analysis assumptions for the group's decision, it is proven that the group expected utility for an alternative should be a weighted sum of the individual member's expected utilities for the alternatives. After each group member does his or her decision analysis of the group's alternatives, the essence of the group decision analysis is to specify the weights based on the interpersonal comparison of utilities and on the relative importance or power of each individual in the group.

Suggested Citation

  • Ralph L. Keeney, 2013. "Foundations for Group Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 103-120, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:10:y:2013:i:2:p:103-120
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2013.0265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2013.0265
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2013.0265?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mongin, Philippe, 1998. "The paradox of the Bayesian experts and state-dependent utility theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 331-361, April.
    2. Ralph Keeney & Robert Nau, 2011. "A theorem for Bayesian group decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-17, August.
    3. James S. Dyer & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1979. "Group Preference Aggregation Rules Based on Strength of Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(9), pages 822-832, September.
    4. Peter C. Fishburn, 1965. "Independence in Utility Theory with Whole Product Sets," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 28-45, February.
    5. Ralph L. Keeney, 1976. "A Group Preference Axiomatization with Cardinal Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 140-145, October.
    6. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 309-309.
    7. Chambers, Christopher P. & Hayashi, Takashi, 2006. "Preference aggregation under uncertainty: Savage vs. Pareto," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 430-440, February.
    8. Mongin Philippe, 1995. "Consistent Bayesian Aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 313-351, August.
    9. Manel Baucells & Rakesh K. Sarin, 2003. "Group Decisions with Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1105-1118, August.
    10. Hylland, Aanund & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1979. "The Impossibility of Bayesian Group Decision Making with Separate Aggregation of Beliefs and Values," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(6), pages 1321-1336, November.
    11. Robert F. Bordley, 2009. "Combining the Opinions of Experts Who Partition Events Differently," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 38-46, March.
    12. James S. Dyer & Ralph F. Miles, 1976. "An Actual Application of Collective Choice Theory to the Selection of Trajectories for the Mariner Jupiter/Saturn 1977 Project," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 220-244, April.
    13. Ramsey, Frank P., 1926. "Truth and Probability," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, in: Braithwaite, R. B. (ed.),The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays, chapter 7, pages 156-198, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dogucan Mazicioglu & Jason R. W. Merrick, 2018. "Behavioral Modeling of Adversaries with Multiple Objectives in Counterterrorism," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 962-977, May.
    2. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 2017. "A Practical Approach to Address Uncertainty in Stakeholder Deliberations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 487-501, March.
    3. Alexandre Bevilacqua Leoneti & René Bañares-Alcántara & Eduardo Cleto Pires & Sonia Valle Walter Borges Oliveira, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria and Multi-Agent Framework for supporting complex decision-making processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1025-1050, October.
    4. Daniel Owen, 2015. "Collaborative Decision Making," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 29-45, March.
    5. Andrea C. Hupman & Jay Simon, 2023. "The Legacy of Peter Fishburn: Foundational Work and Lasting Impact," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, March.
    6. Fujun Hou, 2015. "A Consensus Gap Indicator and Its Application to Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 415-428, May.
    7. Kontić, Branko & Bohanec, Marko & Kontić, Davor & Trdin, Nejc & Matko, Maruša, 2016. "Improving appraisal of sustainability of energy options – A view from Slovenia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 154-171.
    8. Yucheng Dong & Yao Li & Ying He & Xia Chen, 2021. "Preference–Approval Structures in Group Decision Making: Axiomatic Distance and Aggregation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 273-295, December.
    9. Ricardo J. G. Mateus & João C. Bana e Costa & Pedro Verga Matos, 2017. "Supporting Multicriteria Group Decisions with MACBETH Tools: Selection of Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Actions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 495-521, May.
    10. Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2019. "A group MCDA method for aiding decision-making of complex problems in public sector: The case of Belo Monte Dam," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Ed Cook & Jason R. W. Merrick, 2023. "Technology Implementation at Capital One," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 178-191, May.
    12. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2016. "Utility Function for modeling Group Multicriteria Decision Making problems as games," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 21-26.
    13. Simon French & Nikolaos Argyris, 2018. "Decision Analysis and Political Processes," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 208-222, December.
    14. Yongzhi Cao, 2014. "Reducing Interval-Valued Decision Trees to Conventional Ones: Comments on Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 204-212, September.
    15. Vicki M. Bier & Simon French, 2020. "From the Editors: Decision Analysis Focus and Trends," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 1-8, March.
    16. Melissa Garber & Shahram Sarkani & Thomas Mazzuchi, 2017. "A Framework for Multiobjective Decision Management with Diverse Stakeholders," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 335-356, July.
    17. Jay Simon & Donald Saari & Donald Saari, 2020. "Interdependent Altruistic Preference Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 189-207, September.
    18. Tom Pape, 2020. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: Concept, measures and application," Papers 2012.13816, arXiv.org.
    19. Fujun Hou, 2016. "The Prametric-Based GDM Procedure Under Fuzzy Environment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 1071-1084, September.
    20. Rakesh K. Sarin & L. Robin Keller, 2013. "From the Editors ---Group Decisions, Preference Elicitation, Experienced Utility, Survival Probabilities, and Portfolio Value of Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 99-102, June.
    21. Pape, Tom, 2017. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: concept, measures and application," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68682, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    22. Roberto Ley-Borrás, 2015. "Deciding on the Decision Situation to Analyze: The Critical First Step of a Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 46-58, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ralph Keeney & Robert Nau, 2011. "A theorem for Bayesian group decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Eric Danan & Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2015. "Harsanyi's Aggregation Theorem with Incomplete Preferences," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 61-69, February.
    3. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2017. "Aggregation of Bayesian preferences: Unanimity vs Monotonicity," Post-Print halshs-01539444, HAL.
    4. Philippe Mongin & Marcus Pivato, 2020. "Social preference under twofold uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 633-663, October.
    5. Mongin, Philippe & Pivato, Marcus, 2015. "Ranking multidimensional alternatives and uncertain prospects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 146-171.
    6. Sprumont, Yves, 2018. "Belief-weighted Nash aggregation of Savage preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 222-245.
    7. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2017. "Aggregation of Bayesian preferences: Unanimity vs Monotonicity," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01539444, HAL.
    8. Gajdos, T. & Tallon, J.-M. & Vergnaud, J.-C., 2008. "Representation and aggregation of preferences under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 68-99, July.
    9. Zuber, Stéphane, 2016. "Harsanyi’s theorem without the sure-thing principle: On the consistent aggregation of Monotonic Bernoullian and Archimedean preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 78-83.
    10. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2017. "Aggregation of Bayesian preferences: Unanimity vs Monotonicity," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 17028, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    11. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2019. "Aggregation of Bayesian preferences: unanimity vs monotonicity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 419-451, March.
    12. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2017. "Fair management of social risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 666-706.
    13. Itzhak Gilboa & Dov Samet & David Schmeidler, 2004. "Utilitarian Aggregation of Beliefs and Tastes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(4), pages 932-938, August.
    14. Antoine Billot & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2016. "Aggregation of Paretian preferences for independent individual uncertainties," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 973-984, December.
    15. Marcus Pivato, 2013. "Voting rules as statistical estimators," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 581-630, February.
    16. Chambers, Christopher P. & Hayashi, Takashi, 2006. "Preference aggregation under uncertainty: Savage vs. Pareto," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 430-440, February.
    17. Frederik S. Herzberg, 2013. "The (im)possibility of collective risk measurement: Arrovian aggregation of variational preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(1), pages 69-92, May.
    18. Sprumont, Yves, 2018. "Preference aggregation under binary uncertainty," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 64-67.
    19. Pivato, Marcus, 2022. "Bayesian social aggregation with accumulating evidence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    20. Crès, Hervé & Gilboa, Itzhak & Vieille, Nicolas, 2011. "Aggregation of multiple prior opinions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(6), pages 2563-2582.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:10:y:2013:i:2:p:103-120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.