By Topic

Linguistic-labels aggregation and consensus measure for autocratic decision making using group recommendations

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
D. Ben-Arieh ; Dept. of Ind. & Manuf. Syst. Eng., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS, USA ; Zhifeng Chen

Group decision making is a common and important activity in everyday life. In many cases, due to inherent uncertainty, experts cannot express their score or preference using exact numbers. The use of linguistic labels makes expert judgment more reliable and informative for decision-making. One of the problems of group decision making in fuzzy domains is aggregating experts' opinions, expressed using linguistic labels, into a group opinion. This aggregation allows the group to select the most "preferred" alternative from a finite set of candidates. The aggregation of individual judgments into a group opinion requires a measured level of consensus. In this paper, by introducing a new linguistic-labels aggregation operation, we present a procedure for handling an autocratic group decision-making process under linguistic assessments. The methodology presented results in two consequent outcomes: a group-based recommendation, and a score for each expert, reflecting the expert's contribution towards the group recommendation. By changing the weights of the experts based on their contributions, we increase the consensus and reinforce the common decision, without forcing the experts to modify their opinions. This methodology allows an autocratic decision maker to use a diversified group of consultants for a succession of decisions reaching a high level of consensus

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans  (Volume:36 ,  Issue: 3 )