Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance of Holistic Evaluation for Multi-criteria Decisions Comparing Selection or Elimination of Alternatives

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Decision Support Systems XIV. Human-Centric Group Decision, Negotiation and Decision Support Systems for Societal Transitions (ICDSST 2024)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 506))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 75 Accesses

Abstract

In some decision situations, the use of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making/Aiding methods cannot capture the real cognitive process performed by Decision-Makers. In this context, behavioral studies can be performed to investigate Decision-Makers’ behavior during the decision process. This study has been undertaken to compare previous studies in order to investigate how Decision-Makers performed holistic evaluations using graphical and tabular visualization presented in the FITradeoff Decision Support System. Results may be applied to other methods using additive aggregation in the MAVT (Multi-Attribute Value Theory) context. The study aims to modify or transform the method based on the inclusion of behavioral aspects observed during the decision process. Thus, in this study an experiment has been designed to conduct holistic evaluations. Eight visualizations are presented arranged in bar graphs and tables, and two decision processes have been investigated – the selection of the best alternative and the elimination of the worst alternative. The experiment has been applied to 134 participants, and the data were collected and analyzed in terms of their probabilities of success and preferences.

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 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
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

References

  1. Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences, and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Belton, V., Stewart, T.: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (eds.) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, Berlin (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/b100605

  4. De Almeida, A.T., Cavalcante, C.A.V., Alencar, M.H., Ferreira, R.J.P., de Almeida-Filho, A.T., Garcez, T.V.: Multicriteria and Multiobjective Models for Risk, Reliability and Maintenance Decision Analysis, vol. 231, Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17969-8

  5. 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, 7–47 (2021)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. 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)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Jacquet-Lagreze, E., Siskos, J.: Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision making, the UTA method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 10(2), 151–164 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Siskos, Y., Grigoroudis, E., Matsatsinis, N.F.: UTA methods. In: Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., Figueira, J. (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 233. Springer, New York (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4

  9. de Almeida, A.T., Frej, E.A., Roselli, L.R.P., Costa, A.P.C.S.: A summary on FITradeoff method with methodological and practical developments and future perspectives. Pesquisa Operacional 43, e268356 (2023)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Czekajski, M., Wachowicz, T., Frej, E.A.: Exploring the combination of holistic evaluation and elicitation by decomposition in FITradeoff: prioritizing cultural tourism products in Poland. Pesquisa Operacional 43, e263454 (2023)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 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)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Santos, I.M., Roselli, L.R.P., L., da Silva, A.L.G., Alencar, L.H.: A supplier selection model for a wholesaler and retailer company based on FITradeoff multicriteria method. Math. Prob. Eng. 2020, 1–14 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  14. 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. Clean. Prod. 260, 121107 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dell’Ovo, M., Oppio, A., Capolongo, S.: Modelling the spatial decision problem. Bridging the gap between theory and practice: SitHealth evaluation tool. In: Decision Support System for the Location of Healthcare Facilities. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, pp. 81–112. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50173-0_4

  16. Alvarez Carrillo, P.A., Roselli, L.R.P., Frej, E.A., et al.: Selecting an agricultural technology package based on the flexible and interactive tradeoff method. Ann. Oper. Res. 314, 377–392 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-3020-y

  17. Frej, E.A., Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, J.A., de Almeida, A.T.: A multicriteria decision model for supplier selection in a food industry based on FITradeoff method. Math. Prob. Eng. 2017, 1–9 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  18. de Almeida, A.T.: Processo de Decisão nas Organizações: Construindo Modelos de Decisão Multicritério, 2Ed. São Paulo: Editora Atlas (No prelo) (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Korhonen, P., Wallenius, J.: Behavioral issues in MCDM: neglected research questions. In: Clímaco, J. (ed.) Multicriteria Analysis. Springer, Berlin, pp. 412–422 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-60667-0_39

  20. 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. LNBIP, vol. 454, pp. 44–58. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07996-2_4

  21. Eagleman, D.: The Brain: A Story of You. Pantheon Books, New York (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  22. 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. 30, 1299–1319 (2023)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Ferreira, E.B., de Vasconcelos, T.R.S., Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: 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, LNBIP, vol. 474, pp 265–276. Springer, Cham (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32534-2_19

  24. 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. 290, 1–23 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Reis Peixoto Roselli, L., de Almeida, A.T.: Analysis of graphical visualizations for multi-criteria decision making in FITradeoff method using a decision neuroscience experiment. In: Moreno-Jiménez, J., Linden, I., Dargam, F., Jayawickrama, U. (eds.) Decision Support Systems X: Cognitive Decision Support Systems and Technologies, ICDSST 2020, LNBP, vol. 384, pp. 30–42. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46224-6_3

  26. Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: Improvements in the FITradeoff decision support system for ranking order problematic based in a behavioral study with NeuroIS tools. In: Davis, F.D., Riedl, R., vom Brocke, J., Léger, PM., Randolph, A.B., Fischer, T. (eds.) Information Systems and Neuroscience. NeuroIS 2020. LNISO, vol. 43, pp. 121–132. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60073-0_14

  27. 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, 1–21 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T.: Analyzing graphical visualization for multi-attribute decision making using EEG and eye-tracker. In NeuroPsychoEconomics Conference, Poster Section, Rome (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Roselli, L.R.P., Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T.: Neuroscience experiment for graphical visualization in the FITradeoff decision support system. In: Chen, Y., Kersten, G., Vetschera, R., Xu, H. (eds.) Group Decision and Negotiation in an Uncertain World. GDN 2018, LNBIP, vol. 315, pp. 56–69. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92874-6_5

  30. de Almeida, A.T., Roselli, L.R.P., Costa, A.P.C.S., Goncalves, J.M.S., Andrade, A.L.: Decision process improvement based on behavioral experiments of multi-attribute choices with graphical visualization. In: 16th Proceedings Society of NeuroEconomics, Philadelphia, USA (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  31. de Almeida, A.T., Roselli, L.R.P.: Visualization for decision support in FITradeoff method: exploring its evaluation with cognitive neuroscience. In: Linden, I., Liu, S., Colot, C. (eds.) Decision Support Systems VII. Data, Information and Knowledge Visualization in Decision Support Systems. ICDSST 2017, LNBIP, vol. 282, pp 61–73. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57487-5_5

  32. 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(2), 1147–1169 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  33. da Silva, A.L.C D.L., Costa, A.P.C.S., 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, 2472–2503 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.13210

  34. Roselli, L.R.P., Pereira, L.D.S., da Silva, A.L.C.D.L., 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 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 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, PM., Randolph, A., Fischer, T. (eds.) Information Systems and Neuroscience, LNISO, vol. 32, pp 365–372. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28144-1_40

  36. 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. 2019, 1–23 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kang, T.H.A., Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T.: Flexible and interactive tradeoff elicitation for multicriteria sorting problems. Asia Pacific J. Oper. Res. 37, 2050020 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Engin, A., Vetschera, R.: Information representation in decision making: The impact of cognitive style and depletion effects. Decis. Support Syst. 103, 94–103 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nermend, K.: The implementation of cognitive neuroscience techniques for fatigue evaluation in participants of the decision-making process. In: Nermend, K., Łatuszyńska, M. (eds.) Neuroeconomic and Behavioral Aspects of Decision Making. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, pp 329–339. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62938-4_21

  40. Özerol, G; Karasakal, E.: A parallel between regret theory and outranking methods for multicriteria decision making under imprecise information. Theor. Decis. 65(1), 45–70 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chuang, H., Lin, C., Chen, Y.: Exploring the triple reciprocity nature of organizational value cocreation behavior using multicriteria decision making analysis. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, pp. 1–15 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Trepel, C., Fox, C.R., Poldrack, R.: A. Prospect theory on the brain? Toward a cognitive neuroscience of decision under risk. Cogn. Brain Res. 23(1), 34–50 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Barberis, N., Xiong, W.: What drives the disposition effect? An analysis of a long‐standing preference‐based explanation. J. Finance 64(2), 751–784 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  44. 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. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, Series in Operations Research, 1st Ed, pp. 1–10 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  45. de Almeida, A.T., Frej, E.A.: Simulation studies for evaluating the use of holistic evaluation and decomposition elicitation in the FITradeoff Method. Working Paper CDSID (2023)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

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

  1. Center for Decision Systems and Information Development (CDSID), Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, PE, Brazil

    Tarsila Rani Soares de Vasconcelos, Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli & Adiel Teixeira de Almeida

Authors
  1. Tarsila Rani Soares de Vasconcelos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

    Sérgio Pedro Duarte

  2. University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

    António Lobo

  3. University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

    Boris Delibašić

  4. IMT Mines Albi, Albi, France

    Daouda Kamissoko

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

de Vasconcelos, T.R.S., Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T. (2024). Performance of Holistic Evaluation for Multi-criteria Decisions Comparing Selection or Elimination of Alternatives. In: Duarte, S.P., Lobo, A., Delibašić, B., Kamissoko, D. (eds) Decision Support Systems XIV. Human-Centric Group Decision, Negotiation and Decision Support Systems for Societal Transitions. ICDSST 2024. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 506. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59376-5_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59376-5_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-59375-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-59376-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation