IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v23y2014i1d10.1007_s10726-012-9327-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-criteria Remote Asynchronous Group Decision Screening: An Experimental Study

Author

Listed:
  • Roman V. Efremov

    (Rey Juan Carlos University)

  • Alexander V. Lotov

    (Dorodnicyn Computing Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences, Lomonosov Moscow State University)

Abstract

A new visualization-based multi-criteria procedure for group decision screening is presented. The procedure supports a group in selecting a small number of alternatives from an initial list described by a collection of attributes which are used as screening criteria. We propose and experimentally study the Group Remote Asynchronous Screening Support (GRASS) procedure that can be used by a large number of participants who are not able to meet face to face. GRASS does not use any interaction between the participants and the group screening is based on the individual preferences expressed by them independently from each other. GRASS uses the concepts of Borda count, by applying the visualization of information to simplify the analysis of large lists of multi-criteria alternatives. Visualization is used to support the individual analysis of the variety of alternatives and the individual selecting of a small number of alternatives from the list for the subsequent scoring through Borda count. Visualization is carried via the Interactive Decision Maps / Reasonable Goals Method (IDM/RGM) technique. We first check a speculative supposition that participants are able to find a single best alternative by using the GRASS procedure. As it is not the case, we re-formulate our hypothesis and check whether the most preferred alternative is part of a short list of alternatives returned through GRASS. The experiment was carried out with senior applied mathematics students who managed to apply GRASS without any problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Roman V. Efremov & Alexander V. Lotov, 2014. "Multi-criteria Remote Asynchronous Group Decision Screening: An Experimental Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 31-48, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:23:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-012-9327-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-012-9327-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-012-9327-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-012-9327-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vladimir Bushenkov & Veijo Kaitala & Alexander Lotov & Matti Pohjola, 1994. "Decision and negotiation support for transboundary air pollution control between Finland, Russia and Estonia," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 69-80, Spring.
    2. Efremov, Roman & Insua, David Rios & Lotov, Alexander, 2009. "A framework for participatory decision support using Pareto frontier visualization, goal identification and arbitration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 459-467, December.
    3. BOAVENTURA de SOUSA SANTOS, 1998. "Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre: Toward a Redistributive Democracy," Politics & Society, , vol. 26(4), pages 461-510, December.
    4. Soloveitchik, David & Ben-Aderet, Nissim & Grinman, Mira & Lotov, Alexander, 2002. "Multiobjective optimization and marginal pollution abatement cost in the electricity sector - An Israeli case study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 571-583, August.
    5. Young, H. P., 1988. "Condorcet's Theory of Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(4), pages 1231-1244, December.
    6. Young, H. P., 1974. "An axiomatization of Borda's rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 43-52, September.
    7. Thomson, William, 1994. "Cooperative models of bargaining," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 35, pages 1237-1284, Elsevier.
    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. Parham Fami Tafreshi & Mohammad Hasan Aghdaie & Majid Behzadian & Mahdieh Ghani Abadi, 2016. "Developing a Group Decision Support System for Advertising Media Evaluation: A Case in the Middle East," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 1021-1048, September.

    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. Brandl, Florian & Peters, Dominik, 2022. "Approval voting under dichotomous preferences: A catalogue of characterizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    2. J Rios & D Rios Insua, 2008. "A framework for participatory budget elaboration support," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(2), pages 203-212, February.
    3. Michel Truchon, 2002. "Choix social et comités de sélection : le cas du patinage artistique," CIRANO Burgundy Reports 2002rb-02, CIRANO.
    4. Yoko Kawada, 2018. "Cosine similarity and the Borda rule," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 1-11, June.
    5. Jinbaek Kim, 2008. "A model and case for supporting participatory public decision making in e-democracy," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 179-193, May.
    6. Gomez, J. & Insua, D. Rios & Alfaro, C., 2016. "A participatory budget model under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 351-358.
    7. Bock, Hans-Hermann & Day, William H. E. & McMorris, F. R., 1998. "Consensus rules for committee elections," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 219-232, May.
    8. Noelia Rico & Camino R. Vela & Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Irene Díaz, 2021. "Reducing the Computational Time for the Kemeny Method by Exploiting Condorcet Properties," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, June.
    9. Frederic Vermeulen, 2002. "Collective Household Models: Principles and Main Results," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 533-564, September.
    10. Le Breton, Michel & Truchon, Michel, 1997. "A Borda measure for social choice functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 249-272, October.
    11. Izat B. Baybusinov & Enrico Maria Fenoaltea & Yi-Cheng Zhang, 2022. "Negotiation problem," Papers 2201.12619, arXiv.org.
    12. Kempf, Hubert & Rossignol, Stéphane, 2013. "National politics and international agreements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 93-105.
    13. Chih Chen, 2015. "Assessing the Pollutant Abatement Cost of Greenhouse Gas Emission Regulation: A Case Study of Taiwan’s Freeway Bus Service Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 477-495, August.
    14. Brandt, Felix & Saile, Christian & Stricker, Christian, 2022. "Strategyproof social choice when preferences and outcomes may contain ties," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    15. Aliaga Lordemann, Javier & Herrerra Jiménez, Alejandro, 2014. "Energy-Mix Scenarios for Bolivia," Documentos de trabajo 8/2014, Instituto de Investigaciones Socio-Económicas (IISEC), Universidad Católica Boliviana.
    16. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Kaplan, Todd R. & Myles, Gareth, 2018. "When costly voting is beneficial," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 33-42.
    17. Lorenzo Bastianello & Marco LiCalzi, 2015. "Target-based solutions for Nash bargaining," Working Papers 5, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    18. Burak Can & Peter Csoka & Emre Ergin, 2017. "How to choose a non-manipulable delegation?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1713, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    19. Núñez, Matías & Sanver, M. Remzi, 2017. "Revisiting the connection between the no-show paradox and monotonicity," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 9-17.
    20. Toyotaka Sakai, 2017. "Considering Collective Choice: The Route 328 Problem in Kodaira City," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 68(3), pages 323-332, September.

    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:spr:grdene:v:23:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-012-9327-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.