BazTech - Yadda

1

Towards cognitive decision support: A model of behavioural assessment of multi-criteria methods

Roszkowska Ewa, Wachowicz Tomasz

Control and Cybernetics

|

2021

|

Vol. 50, No. 1

145--168

EN

The Negotiation Support Systems often implement multiple criteria decision aiding (MCDA) techniques for building a negotiation scoring system. Those formal models should meet the needs, motivations, expectations, and cognitive abilities of users. In this paper, we try to explore the effects of decision maker’s subjective perception of ease of use, time requirements, interface, preference representation, and efficiency of a particular MCDA method on the choice regarding the future use of this method. The multinomial logistic regression model is built and analysed. The analysis is based on data from online decision making experiments, where three MCDA methods were implemented, i.e. AHP, SMART, and TOPSIS. The study provides several interesting findings, concerning the behavioural aspects of multiple criteria decision aiding in software support systems. Most of the users recommended TOPSIS as the best one for supporting decisions in the future. This is a fast technique, for which we used an attractive graphical interface, suggesting that these factors play a crucial role in the users’ choices. However, the causative regression model showed that the user’s positive experience in using a particular method, i.e. its effectiveness in solving an exemplary numerical case, has the highest impact on the method’s choice for future use. The second most important factor is the adequacy in representing the user’s preferences by this method. We show, however, that the strengths of effects and their significance may vary across the methods. Understanding the decision maker’s evaluations of the MCDA techniques may help build a cognitive negotiation support system that satisfies the user’s expectations.

2

Reference points - based methods in supporting the evaluation of negotiation offers

Wachowicz T., Brzostowski J., Roszkowska E.

Operations Research and Decisions

|

2012

|

Vol. 22, No. 4

122--137

EN

Scoring the negotiation template and building a scoring system for negotiation offers is a starting point for analysis of negotiation. It is usually done by means of a classical additive scoring model. Recent research confirms, however, that TOPSIS may be a good alternative to SAW-based models, since it significantly facilitates the processes of template definition and elicitation of negotiator’s preferences. Fundamental ideas of the TOPSIS, VIKOR and BIPOLAR methods have been analysed and attempts were made to hybridize some of their notions to propose an alternative method for evaluating negotiation offers.

3

Using the analytic hierarchy process in evaluating decision alternatives

Cabała P.

Operations Research and Decisions

|

2010

|

Vol. 20, No. 1

5-23

EN

In this paper the method of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is described. At the beginning the general assumptions of the method are characterized and discussed. These are related to assumptions held within General Systems Theory. Then the problems of pairwise comparisons of elements, with its use of a specific scale, as well as the resulting reciprocal matrix are presented. There are many ways of estimating the eigenvectors of this matrix. These eigenvectors reflect weights of preferences. Despite the fact that we are able to evaluate the consistency of judgements the problem of acceptable weights still remains. Therefore, by way of an illustration, the method for the sensitivity analysis of preferences is also discussed in the paper.