IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v13y2025i7p1182-d1627579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hesitant Fuzzy Consensus Reaching Process for Large-Scale Group Decision-Making Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Wei Liang

    (School of Economics and Management, Minjiang University, Fuzhou 350108, China
    Department of Computer Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Álvaro Labella

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Meng-Jun Meng

    (School of Vocational Education, Shandong Youth University of Political Science, Jinan 250103, China)

  • Ying-Ming Wang

    (Decision Science Institute, School of Economics & Management, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China)

  • Rosa M. Rodríguez

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

Abstract

The emergence and popularity of social media have made large-scale group decision-making (LSGDM) problems increasingly common, resulting in significant research interest in this field. LSGDM involves numerous evaluators, which can lead to disagreements and hesitancy among them. Hesitant fuzzy sets (HFSs) become crucial in this context as they capture the uncertainty and hesitancy among evaluators. On the other hand, research on the Consensus Reaching Process (CRP) becomes particularly important in dealing with the inevitable differences among the great number of evaluators. Ways to mitigate these differences to reach an agreement are a crucial area of study. For this reason, this paper presents a new CRP model to deal with LSGDM problems in hesitant fuzzy environments. First, HFSs and Normal-type Hesitant Fuzzy Sets (N-HFSs) are introduced to integrate evaluators’ subgroup and collective opinions, aiming to preserve as much decision information as possible while reducing computational complexity. Subsequently, a CRP with a detailed feedback suggestion generation mechanism is developed, which considers the willingness of evaluators to modify their opinions, thereby improving the effectiveness of reaching an agreement. Finally, a LSGDM framework that does not require any normalization process is proposed, and its feasibility and robustness are demonstrated through a numerical example.

Suggested Citation

  • Wei Liang & Álvaro Labella & Meng-Jun Meng & Ying-Ming Wang & Rosa M. Rodríguez, 2025. "Hesitant Fuzzy Consensus Reaching Process for Large-Scale Group Decision-Making Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-28, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:7:p:1182-:d:1627579
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/7/1182/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/13/7/1182/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huchang Liao & Zeshui Xu & Meimei Xia, 2014. "Multiplicative Consistency Of Hesitant Fuzzy Preference Relation And Its Application In Group Decision Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(01), pages 47-76.
    2. Meng, Fanyong & Tang, Jie & An, Qingxian, 2023. "Cooperative game based two-stage consensus adjustment mechanism for large-scale group decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Kaixin Gong & Weimin Ma & Wenjing Lei & Mark Goh, 2024. "A dynamic trust network and influence measure-based consensus model for large-scale group decision-making with incomplete intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 75(6), pages 1157-1177, June.
    4. Meimei Xia & Zeshui Xu & Na Chen, 2013. "Some Hesitant Fuzzy Aggregation Operators with Their Application in Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 259-279, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tang, Jie & Li, Zi-Jun & Meng, Fan-Yong & Gong, Zai-Wu & Pedrycz, Witold, 2025. "Biform game consensus analysis of group decision making with unconnected social network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 324(1), pages 259-275.
    2. Xiaoyan Zhang & Qian Yang, 2022. "A Novel Method for Decision Making by Double-Quantitative Rough Sets in Hesitant Fuzzy Systems," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-24, June.
    3. Mi Jung Son & Jin Han Park & Ka Hyun Ko, 2019. "Some Hesitant Fuzzy Hamacher Power-Aggregation Operators for Multiple-Attribute Decision-Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-33, July.
    4. Qasim Noor & Tabasam Rashid & Syed Muhammad Husnine, 2021. "An extended TDM method under probabilistic interval-valued hesitant fuzzy environment for stock selection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-24, May.
    5. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2015. "Generalized analytic network process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(1), pages 277-288.
    6. Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "A Hesitant Fuzzy Combined Compromise Solution Framework-Based on Discrimination Measure for Ranking Sustainable Third-Party Reverse Logistic Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    7. Wanying Xie & Zeshui Xu & Zhiliang Ren & Hai Wang, 2018. "Probabilistic Linguistic Analytic Hierarchy Process and Its Application on the Performance Assessment of Xiongan New Area," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(06), pages 1693-1724, November.
    8. Gitinavard, Hossein & Mousavi, S. Meysam & Vahdani, Behnam, 2017. "Soft computing based on hierarchical evaluation approach and criteria interdependencies for energy decision-making problems: A case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 556-577.
    9. Lihong Wang & Zaiwu Gong, 2017. "Priority of a Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relation with a Normal Distribution in Meteorological Disaster Risk Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Liu, Bingsheng & Shen, Yinghua & Zhang, Wei & Chen, Xiaohong & Wang, Xueqing, 2015. "An interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy principal component analysis model-based method for complex multi-attribute large-group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(1), pages 209-225.
    11. Akshay Hinduja & Manju Pandey, 2019. "A Distance-based Method for Computing Priorities of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relation and Its Application in AHP," Vision, , vol. 23(4), pages 329-340, December.
    12. Donata Marasini & Piero Quatto & Enrico Ripamonti, 2016. "Intuitionistic fuzzy sets in questionnaire analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 767-790, March.
    13. Rajkumar Verma & Bhu Dev Sharma, 2013. "New operations over hesitant fuzzy sets," Fuzzy Information and Engineering, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 129-146, June.
    14. Arooj Adeel & Muhammad Akram & Ali N.A. Koam, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making under m HF ELECTRE-I and H m F ELECTRE-I," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-30, May.
    15. Galo, Nadya Regina & Calache, Lucas Daniel Del Rosso & Carpinetti, Luiz Cesar Ribeiro, 2018. "A group decision approach for supplier categorization based on hesitant fuzzy and ELECTRE TRI," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 182-196.
    16. Shen, Yufeng & Ma, Xueling & Kou, Gang & Rodríguez, Rosa M. & Zhan, Jianming, 2025. "Consensus methods with Nash and Kalai–Smorodinsky bargaining game for large-scale group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 321(3), pages 865-883.
    17. Xiaolin Xun & Yongbo Yuan, 2020. "Research on the urban resilience evaluation with hybrid multiple attribute TOPSIS method: an example in China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(1), pages 557-577, August.
    18. Tong Wu, 2024. "Heterogeneous Opinion Dynamics Considering Consensus Evolution in Social Network Group Decision-Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 159-194, February.
    19. Lifei Zhang & Fanyong Meng, 2018. "An Approach to Interval-Valued Hesitant Fuzzy Multiattribute Group Decision Making Based on the Generalized Shapley-Choquet Integral," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-19, June.
    20. García-Martínez, Jose A. & Mayor-Serra, Antonio J. & Meca, Ana, 2023. "Efficient effort equilibrium in cooperation with pairwise cost reduction," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jmathe:v:13:y:2025:i:7:p:1182-:d:1627579. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.