Abstract
Several behavioral studies have been performed related to MCDM/A (Multi-Criteria Decision Making/Aiding) methods, although not many of them aim directly to modulate (transform) those methods. Some of the studies intended to modulate methods provide suggestions to improve the FITradeoff decision process and the design of its Decision Support System (DSS). In this context, this paper presents behavioral study which has been constructed during the Covid-19 Pandemic and has been applied until now. These studies are concerned with the use of visualization in holistic evaluation for multicriteria decision problems decision using online survey to compare bar graphics and tables during the holistic evaluation Although these studies are contextualized for the FITradeoff Method, their results can be applied to any other methods in the context of MAVT (Multi-Attribute Value Theory), with additive aggregation. This study tested how DMs use bar graphics and tables to perform the holistic evaluation of alternatives. The experiment considers two types of visualizations: bar graphics and tables. Also, it uses two decision processes: the selection of the best alternative and the elimination of the worst alternative. In the past, DMs can only select the best alternative during the decision process in the FITradeoff DSS. However now, the elimination process is also included in the DSS, providing flexibility for Decision-Makers. As result, the experiment suggests that for some types of visualizations, the DMs performed better on the elimination process than the selection process. Moreover, results also showed that most of DMs prefer to select the best alternative than to eliminate the worst, even performing better in the elimination process. Hence, this result reinforces the flexibility provided in the DSS, but recommend another experiment using neuroscience tools, permitting to compare cognitive efforts during both decision process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Santos, I.M., Roselli, L.R.P, da Silva, A.L.G, Alencar, L.H.: A supplier selection model for a wholesaler and retailer company based on FITradeoff multicriteria method. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 1–14 (2020)
Frej, E.A., Roselli, L.R.P., Araújo de Almeida, J., de Almeida, A.T.: A multicriteria decision model for supplier selection in a food industry based on FITradeoff method. Math. Probl. Eng. 2017, 1–9 (2017)
Chai, J., Liu, J., Ngai, E.: Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: a systematic review of literature. Expert Syst. Appl. 40(10), 3872–3885 (2013)
Barla, S.B.: A case study of supplier selection for lean supply by using a mathematical model. Logist. Inf. Manage. 16, 451–459 (2003)
Keeney, R.L, Raiffa, H.: Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences, and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York (1976)
Belton, V., Stewart, T.: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)
Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (eds.): Springer, Berlin (2005)
de Almeida, A.T., Cavalcante, C., Alencar, M., Ferreira, R., de Almeida-Filho, A.T., Garcez. T.: Multicriteria and Multi-Objective Models for Risk, Reliability and Maintenance Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 231. New York: Springer (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17969-8
de Almeida, A.T., Almeida, J.A., Costa, A.P.C.S., Almeida-Filho, A.T.: A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: flexible and interactive tradeoff. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 250(1), 179–191 (2016)
de Almeida, A.T., Frej, E.A., Roselli, L.R.P.: Combining holistic and decomposition paradigms in preference modeling with the flexibility of FITradeoff. CEJOR 29(1), 7–47 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-020-00728-z
Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T., Costa, A.P.C.S.: Using data visualization for ranking alternatives with partial information and interactive tradeoff elicitation. Oper. Res. Int. J. 19(4), 909–931 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-00444-2
Kang, T.H.A., Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T.: Flexible and interactive tradeoff elicitation for multicriteria sorting problems. Asia Pac. J. Oper. Res. 37, 2050020 (2020)
Frej, E.A., Ekel, P., de Almeida, A.T.: A benefit-to-cost ratio based approach for portfolio selection under multiple criteria with incomplete preference information. Inf. Sci. 545, 487–498 (2021)
Marques, A.C., Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T.: Multicriteria decision support for project portfolio selection with the FITradeoff method. Omega-Int. J. Manage. Sci. 111, 102661 (2022)
Kang, T.H.A., Júnior, A.M.D.C.S., de Almeida, A.T.: Evaluating electric power generation technologies: a multicriteria analysis based on the FITradeoff method. Energy 165, 10–20 (2018)
Alvarez Carrillo, P.A., Roselli, L.R.P., Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T.: Selecting an agricultural technology package based on the flexible and interactive tradeoff method. Ann. Oper. Res. 314, 1–16. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-3020-y
Monte, M.B.S., Morais, D.C.: A decision model for identifying and solving problems in an urban water supply system. Water Resour. Manage. 33(14), 4835–4848 (2019)
Fossile, D.K., Frej, E.A., da Costa, S.E.G., de Lima, E.P., de Almeida, A.T.: Selecting the most viable renewable energy source for Brazilian ports using the FITradeoff method. J. Cleaner Prod. 260, 121107 (2020)
Dell'Ovo, M., Oppio, A., Capolongo, S.: Decision Support System for the Location of Healthcare Facilities SitHealth Evaluation Tool. PoliMI SpringerBriefs. Springer, Switzerland (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50173-0
Pergher, I., Frej, E.A., Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: Integrating simulation and FITradeoff method for scheduling rules selection in job-shop production systems. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 227, 107669 (2020)
Eagleman, D.: The Brain: A story of you. Pantheon Books, New York (2015)
de Almeida, A., Rosselli, L., Costa Morais, D., Costa, A.: Neuroscience tools for behavioural studies in group decision and negotiation. In: Kilgour, D.M., Eden, C. (eds.) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation, 1st edn., pp. 1–24. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands (2020)
Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: Use of the alpha-theta diagram as a decision neuroscience tool for analyzing holistic evaluation in decision making. Ann. Oper. Res. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04495-1
Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T., Frej, E.A.: Decision neuroscience for improving data visualization of decision support in the FITradeoff method. Oper. Res. Int. Journal 19(4), 933–953 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-00445-1
Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: The use of the success‐based decision rule to support the holistic evaluation process in FITradeoff. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 2021, 1299–1319 (2023)
Roselli, L.R.P., Pereira, L., da Silva, A., de Almeida, A.T., Morais, D.C., Costa, A.P.C.S.: Neuroscience experiment applied to investigate decision-maker behavior in the tradeoff elicitation procedure. Ann. Oper. Res. 289(1), 67–84 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03394-w
Carneiro de Lima da Silva, A.L., Cabral Seixas Costa, A.P., de Almeida, A.T.:Analysis of the cognitive aspects of the preference elicitation process in the compensatory context: a neuroscience experiment with FITradeoff. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 31 (2022)
da Silva, A.L.C.D.L., Costa, A.P.C.S., de Almeida, A.T.: Exploring cognitive aspects of FITradeoff method using neuroscience tools. Ann. Oper. Res. 312, 1–23 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03894-0
Carneiro de Lima da Silva, A.L., Cabral Seixas Costa, A.P.: FITradeoff decision support system: an exploratory study with neuroscience tools. In: Davis, F., Riedl, R., vom Brocke, J., Léger, P.M., Randolph, A., Fischer, T. (eds.) Information Systems and Neuroscience. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol. 32, pp. 365–372 Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28144-1_40
Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: Neuroscience behavioral studies for modula-tion of the FITradeoff method. In: Morais, D.C., Fang, L. (eds) Group Decision and Negotiation: Methodological and Practical Issues. GDN 2022. Lecture Notes in Busi-ness Information Processing, vol. 454. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07996-2_4
Korhonen, P., Wallenius, J.: Behavioral Issues in MCDM: Neglected research questions. In: Clímaco, J. (eds) Multicriteria Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-60667-0_39
Wallenius, H., Wallenius, J.: Implications of world mega trends for MCDM research. In: Ben amor, s., De Almeida, A., De Miranda, J, Aktas, E. (Eds.). Advanced Studies in Multi-Criteria Decision Making, pp. 1–10 New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, Series in Operations Research, 1st Ed (2020)
Acknowledgment
This work had partial support from the Brazilian Research Council (CNPq) [grant 308531/2015–9;312695/2020–9] and the Foundation of Support in Science and Technology of the State of Pernambuco (FACEPE) [APQ-0484–3.08/17].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ferreira, E.B., de Vasconcelos, T.R.S., Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T. (2023). Behavioral Studies for the Use of Visualization in Holistic Evaluation for Multicriteria Decision Problems Decision. In: Liu, S., Zaraté, P., Kamissoko, D., Linden, I., Papathanasiou, J. (eds) Decision Support Systems XIII. Decision Support Systems in An Uncertain World: The Contribution of Digital Twins . ICDSST 2023. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 474. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32534-2_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32534-2_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-32533-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-32534-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)