Neuroscience Tools for Group Decision and Negotiation

Almeida, Adiel Teixeira de; Roselli, Lucia Reis Peixoto; Morais, Danielle Costa; Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-49629-6_53

“…Roselli et al (2019) used neuroscience methods to inform the development of data visualizations. See also de Almeida et al (2020b). Recently, there has also been rapid development in the areas of big data and affective computing (see, e.g., Shoumy et al 2020).…”

Section: Mcda Methods In Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multicriteria Methods for Group Decision Processes: An Overview

Salo

¹

,

Hämäläinen

²

,

Lahtinen

³

2021

Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

4

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Important decisions are often taken by groups of decision-makers who need to choose among several alternatives in view of multiple objectives, in recognition of the interests of stakeholders. Such decision problems can be supported with the methods and processes of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) which foster collaboration, lend structure to the decision process, and help in managing problem complexity. In this chapter, we examine rationales for using MCDA methods in group decision processes, outline typical phases of these processes, summarize widely used MCDA methods and discuss some of their recent methodological extensions. We also provide guidelines for the design and implementation of MCDA-assisted group decision processes, based on an examination of behavioral factors and a structured review of selected case studies. We conclude with an outlook for the future in light of recent developments and trends.

show abstract

“…(2012) and de Almeida et al. (2020), the neuroscience approach can be considered an important supplement for investigating decision‐making processes since taking this approach leads to a better understanding of DMs’ behavior. Therefore, using neuroscience tools, suggestions can be provided in order to improve the FITradeoff DSS and to support the analyst in the advising process performed with DMs.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of the success‐based decision rule to support the holistic evaluation process in FITradeoff

Roselli

¹

,

Almeida

²

2021

Int Trans Operational Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The flexible and interactive tradeoff (FITradeoff) method is a multi-criteria decision-making/aiding (MCDM/A) method in the context of the multi-attribute value theory. The implementation of the FITradeoff method is supported by a decision support system (DSS), which includes an elicitation procedure for scaling constants with the flexibility of including a holistic evaluation. The holistic evaluation has graphics that can be used to assist decision-makers (DMs) during the FITradeoff decision process. In this context, three neuroscience experiments have been conducted to investigate how a DM uses the graphics to evaluate an MCDM/A problem. Thus, the main contribution of this paper is to propose the success-based decision rule. Based on this rule, recommendations are made concerning the holistic evaluation. The first is that this rule can assist the analyst to advise DMs with information on the visualization's probability of success. Second, this rule suggests improvements that can be made to the design of the FITradeoff DSS.

show abstract

Multicriteria Methods for Group Decision Processes: An Overview

Salo

¹

,

Hämäläinen

²

,

Lahtinen

³

2021

Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Important decisions are often taken by groups of decision-makers who need to choose among several alternatives in view of multiple objectives, in recognition of the interests of stakeholders. Such decision problems can be supported with the methods and processes of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) which foster collaboration, lend structure to the decision process, and help in managing problem complexity. In this chapter, we examine rationales for using MCDA methods in group decision processes, outline typical phases of these processes, summarize widely used MCDA methods and discuss some of their recent methodological extensions. We also provide guidelines for the design and implementation of MCDA-assisted group decision processes, based on an examination of behavioral factors and a structured review of selected case studies. We conclude with an outlook for the future in light of recent developments and trends.

show abstract

Neuroscience Tools for Group Decision and Negotiation

Cited by 4 publications

References 56 publications

Multicriteria Methods for Group Decision Processes: An Overview

Multicriteria Methods for Group Decision Processes: An Overview

The use of the success‐based decision rule to support the holistic evaluation process in FITradeoff

Multicriteria Methods for Group Decision Processes: An Overview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About