Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Defining Preferences and Reference Points – A Multiple Criteria Decision Making Experiment

  • Conference paper
Group Decision and Negotiation. A Process-Oriented View (GDN 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 180))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper we study how do the decision makers proceed in analyzing the multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) problem. Based on the results of the questionnaire-based experiment, we investigate how do they define the reference points in the decision problem and specify their preferences. We also study what kind of problems do they encounter while analyzing such a multiple criteria decision making problem. Finally, we consider what MCDM methods could be used to fit the decision makers way of analyzing the preferences and conducting the decision process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bana, C.A., De Corte, J.-M., Vansnick, J.-C.: On the mathematical foundation of MACBETH. In: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, pp. 409–437. Springer (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brans, J.-P., Vincke, P.: A preference ranking organisation method: The PROMETHEE method for MCDM. Manage. Sci. 31(6), 647–656 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Brzostowski, J., Wachowicz, T.: NegoManage: A System for Supporting Bilateral Negotiations. Group Decis Negot, 1–34 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fife-Schaw, C., Breakwell, G., Hammond, S., Fife-Schaw, C., Smith, J.: Levels of measurement. Res. Method Psychol. 3, 50–63 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Guitouni, A., Martel, J.-M.: Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 109(2), 501–521 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Heath, C., Larrick, R.P., Wu, G.: Goals as reference points. Cognitive Psychol. 38(1), 79–109 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hwang, C.-L., Yoon, K.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer, New York (1981)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Jahanshahloo, G.R., Lotfi, F.H., Izadikhah, M.: Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data. Appl. Math. Comput. 181(2), 1544–1551 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs. Wiley, New York (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kersten, G.E., Noronha, S.J.: WWW-based negotiation support: design, implementation, and use. Decis. Support Sys. 25(2), 135–154 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Konarzewska-Gubala, E.: BIPOLAR: multiple criteria decision aid using bipolar reference system. Document du LAMSADE 56 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Larichev, O.I., Moshkovich, H.M.: Verbal decision analysis for unstructured problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1997)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Raiffa, H., Richardson, J., Metcalfe, D.: Negotiation analysis: The science and art of collaborative decision making. The Balknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Roszkowska, E., Wachowicz, T.: Negotiation Support with Fuzzy TOPSIS. In: Teixeira de Almeida, A., Costa Morais, D. (eds.) Group Decision and Negotiations 2012 Proceedings, Editoria Universitaria, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, pp. 161–174 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Roy, B.: Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples. RAIRO-Operations Research-Recherche Opérationnelle 2(V1), 57-75 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw Hill, New York (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wachowicz, T., Błaszczyk, P.: TOPSIS based approach to scoring negotiating offers in negotiation support systems. Group Decis. Negot. 22, 1021–1050 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Zopounidis, C., Doumpos, M.: Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 138(2), 229–246 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economy and Management, University of Bialystok, Warszawska 63, 15-062, Bialystok, Poland

    Ewa Roszkowska

  2. Department of Operations Research, University of Economics in Katowice, 1 Maja 50, 40-287, Katowice, Poland

    Tomasz Wachowicz

Authors
  1. Ewa Roszkowska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tomasz Wachowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculté d’Informatique IRIT, Toulouse 1 Capitole University, Toulouse, France

    Pascale Zaraté

  2. InterNeg Research Centre, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Gregory E. Kersten

  3. University of Liverpool, and Universidad de la Frontera, Temuco, Chile

    Jorge E. Hernández

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Roszkowska, E., Wachowicz, T. (2014). Defining Preferences and Reference Points – A Multiple Criteria Decision Making Experiment. In: Zaraté, P., Kersten, G.E., Hernández, J.E. (eds) Group Decision and Negotiation. A Process-Oriented View. GDN 2014. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 180. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07179-4_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07179-4_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07178-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07179-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation