Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Use of the Alpha-Theta Diagram as a decision neuroscience tool for analyzing holistic evaluation in decision making

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study has been proposed to improve the holistic evaluation in the FITradeoff decision-making process. The study generates recommendations that can support the analyst during the advising process with the decision-maker. A neuroscience tool is applied to conduct a behavioral study. Using an electroencephalogram, the Alpha and Theta activities have been monitored from a sample of twenty-seven management engineering students. The neuroscience experiment is composed of graphical and tabular visualizations. These visualizations represent multi-criteria decision problems, and they are presented in the holistic evaluation phase of the FITradeoff method. As result, the Alpha-Theta Diagram has been obtained, based on frontal Theta and parietal Alpha activities. The Alpha-Theta Diagram is a tool proposed to be applied during the holistic evaluation phase, with the visualizations. Thus, based on the Alpha-Theta Diagram, the visualizations in which the decision-maker presents the adequate pattern of behavioral, with high cognitive effort and high engagement are revealed. Statistical tests show that in most of the visualizations there have been significant cognitive effort and/or engagement of participants. Thus, based on this diagram, recommendations can consider the visualizations that use the adequate patterns of behavioral. As conclusion, the result reinforces which visualization should be used for holistic evaluation during the FITradeoff decision process. For future studies, rigorous investigations should be performed with EEG responses, specially to develop the Alpha-Theta Diagram for participants.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Supplementary material is available for this paper. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to lrpr@cdsid.org.br.

References

  • Barberis, N., & Xiong, W. (2009). What drives the disposition effect? An analysis of a long-standing preference-based explanation. The Journal of Finance, 64(2), 751–784.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barla, S. B. (2003). A case study of supplier selection for lean supply by using a mathematical model. Logistics Information Management, 16, 451–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belton, V., & Stewart, T. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: An integrated approach. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camara e Silva, L., Daher, S. D. F. D., Santiago, K. T. M., & Costa, A. P. C. S. (2019). Selection of an integrated security area for locating a state military police station based on MCDM/A method. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC) pp. 1530–1534.

  • Camilo, D. G. G., de Souza, R. P., Frazão, T. D. C., & da Costa Junior, J. F. (2020). Multi-criteria analysis in the health area: Selection of the most appropriate triage system for the emergency care units in natal. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 20(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrillo, P. A. A., Roselli, L. R. P., Frej, E. A., & de Almeida, A. T. (2018). Selecting an agricultural technology package based on the flexible and interactive tradeoff method. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-3020-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavanagh, J. F., & Frank, M. J. (2014). Frontal theta as a mechanism for cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(8), 414–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chai, J., Liu, J., & Ngai, E. (2013). Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(10), 3872–3885.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • Cooper, P. S., Wong, A. S. W., Mckewen, M., Michie, P. T., & Karayanidis, F. (2017). Frontoparietal theta oscillations during proactive control are associated with goal-updating and reduced behavioral variability. Biological Psychology, 129, 253–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • da Silva, A. L. C. L., Costa, A. P. C. S. & de Almeida, A. T. (2021). Exploring cognitive aspects of FITradeoff method using neuroscience tools. Annals of Operations Research, 1–23.

  • de Almeida, A. T., & Roselli, L. R. P. (2017). Visualization for decision support in FITradeoff method: exploring its evaluation with cognitive neuroscience. Lecture notes in business information processing (282nd ed., pp. 61–73). Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Almeida, A. T., Roselli, L. R. P. (2020). NeuroIS to improve the FITradeoff decision-making process and Decision Support System. In Proceedings of the NeuroIS Retreat 2020.

  • de Almeida, A., Rosselli, L., Costa Morais, D., & Costa, A. (2020). Neuroscience tools for behavioural studies in group decision and negotiation. In D. M. Kilgour & C. Eden (Eds.), Handbook of group decision and negotiation (pp. 1–24). Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Almeida, A. T., Frej, E. A., & Roselli, L. R. P. (2021). Combining holistic and decomposition paradigms in preference modeling with the flexibility of FITradeoff. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 29, 7–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-020-00728-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Loof, E., Vassena, E., Janssens, C., De Taeye, L., Meurs, A., Van Roost, D., & Verguts, T. (2019). Preparing for hard times: Scalp and intracranial physiological signatures of proactive cognitive control. Psychophysiology, 56(10), e13417.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Almeida, A. T., Almeida, J. A., Costa, A. P. C. S., & Almeida-Filho, A. T. (2016). A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoff. European Journal of Operational Research, 250(1), 179–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Almeida, A. T., Cavalcante, C. A. V., Alencar, M. H., Ferreira, R. J. P., de Almeida-Filho, A. T., & Garcez, T. V. (2015). Multicriteria and multiobjective models for risk, reliability and maintenance decision analysis. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Macedo, P. P., de Miranda Mota, C. M., & Sola, A. V. H. (2018). Meeting the Brazilian energy efficiency law: A flexible and interactive multicriteria proposal to replace non-efficient motors. Sustainable Cities and Society, 41, 822–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dell’Ovo, M., Frej, E. A., Oppio, A., Capolongo, S., Morais, D. C., & de Almeida, A. T. (2017). Multicriteria decision making for healthcare facilities location with visualization based on FITradeoff method. In International Conference on Decision Support System Technology (pp. 32–44). Springer.

  • Demirel, N., Demirel, T., Deveci, M., & Vardar, G. (2017). Location selection for underground natural gas storage using Choquet integral. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 45, 368–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimoka, A., Pavlou, P A., Davis, F. D. (2007). Neuro-IS: The potential of cognitive neuroscience for information systems research. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Information Systems pp. 1–20.

  • Do, T.-T.N., Wang, Y.-K., & Lin, C.-T. (2020). Increase in brain effective connectivity in multitasking but not in a high-fatigue state. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, 13(3), 566–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Camerer, C. F. (2007). Social neuroeconomics: The neural circuitry of social preferences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(10), 419–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figueira, J., Greco, S., & Ehrgott, M. (Eds.). (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, Berlin.

  • Fossile, D. K., Frej, E. A., da Costa, S. E. G., de Lima, E. P., & de Almeida, A. T. (2020). Selecting the most viable renewable energy source for brazilian ports using the FITradeoff method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 260, 121107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frej, E. A., Roselli, L. R. P., Araújo de Almeida, J., & de Almeida, A. T. (2017). A multicriteria decision model for supplier selection in a food industry based on FITradeoff method. Mathematical Problems in Engineering.

  • Frej, E. A., de Almeida, A. T., & Costa, A. P. C. S. (2019). Using data visualization for ranking alternatives with partial information and interactive tradeoff elicitation. Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-00444-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frej, E. A., Ekel, P., & de Almeida, A. T. (2021). A benefit-to-cost ratio based approach for portfolio selection under multiple criteria with incomplete preference information. Information Sciences, 545, 487–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glimcher, P. W., & Rustichini, A. (2004). Neuroeconomics: The consilience of brain and decision. Science, 5695, 447–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goucher-Lambert, K., Moss, J., & Cagan, J. (2017). Inside the mind: Using neuroimaging to understand moral product preference judgments involving sustainability. Journal of Mechanical Design, 139(4), 041–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hines, W. W., & Montgomery, D. C. (1990). Probability and statistics in engineering and management science. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm, A., Lukander, K., Korpela, J., Sallinen, M., & Müller, K. M. I. (2009). Estimating brain load from the EEG. The Scientific World Journal, 9, 639–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, L. T., Dolan, R. J., & Behrens, T. E. (2014). Hierarchical competitions subserving multi-attribute choice. Nature Neuroscience, 17(11), 1613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Izadikhah, M., & Farzipoor Saen, R. (2020). Ranking sustainable suppliers by context-dependent data envelopment analysis. Annals of Operations Research, 293, 607–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssens, C., De Loof, E., Pourtois, G., & Verguts, T. (2016). The time course of cognitive control implementation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1266–1272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, T. H. A., Frej, E. A., & de Almeida, A. T. (2020). Flexible and interactive tradeoff elicitation for multicriteria sorting problems. Asia Pacific Journal of Operational Research, 37, 2050020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, T. H. A., Júnior, A. M. D. C. S., & de Almeida, A. T. (2018). Evaluating electric power generation technologies: A multicriteria analysis based on the FITradeoff method. Energy, 165, 10–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decision analysis with multiple conflicting objectives. Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenning, P., & Plassmann, H. (2005). NeuroEconomics: An overview from an economic perspective. Brain Research Bulletin, 67(5), 343–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khushaba, R. N., Wise, C., Kodagoda, S., Louviere, J., Kahn, B. E., & Townsend, C. (2013). Consumer neuroscience: Assessing the brain response to marketing stimuli using electroencephalogram (EEG) and eye tracking. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(9), 3803–3812.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimesch, W., Sauseng, P., & Hanslmayr, S. (2007). EEG alpha oscillations: The inhibition-timing hypothesis. Brain Research Reviews, 53, 63–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimesch, W. (1999). EEG alpha and theta oscillations reflect cognitive and memory performance: A review and analysis. Brain Research Reviews, 29, 169–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lima, E. S., Viegas, R. A., & Costa, A. P. C. S. (2017). A multicriteria method based approach to the BPMM selection problem. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC) pp. 3334–3339.

  • Linkov, I., Cormier, S., Gold, J., Satterstrom, F. K., & Bridges, T. (2012). Using our brains to develop better policy. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(3), 374–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01683.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G., Rick, S., & Cohen, J. D. (2008). Neuroeconomics. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 647–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, J. S. P., Mathan, S., & Yeung, N. (2011). Trial-by-trial variations in subjective attentional state are reflected in ongoing prestimulus EEG alpha oscillations. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendes, J. A. J., Frej, E. A., de Almeida, A. T., & Almeida, J. A. (2020). Evaluation of flexible and interactive tradeoff method based on numerical simulation experiments. Pesquisa Operacional, 40, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monte, M. B. S., & Morais, D. C. (2019). A decision model for identifying and solving problems in an urban water supply system. Water Resources Management, 33(14), 4835–4848.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, C. (2011). Neuromarketing: the new science of consumer behavior. Society, 48(2), 131–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nermend, K. (2014). The implementation of cognitive neuroscience techniques for fatigue evaluation in participants of the decision-making process. In Neuroeconomic and Behavioral Aspects of Decision Making pp. 329–339.

  • Novikov, N. A., Nurislamova, Y. M., Zhozhikashvili, N. A., Kalenkovich, E. E., Lapina, A. A., & Chernyshev, B. V. (2017). Slow and fast responses: Two mechanisms of trial outcome processing revealed by eeg oscillations. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurislamova, Y. M., Novikov, N. A., Zhozhikashvili, N. A., & Chernyshev, B. V. (2019). Enhanced theta-band coherence between midfrontal and posterior parietal areas reflects post-feedback adjustments in the state of outcome uncertainty. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 13, 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özerol, G., & Karasakal, E. (2008). A parallel between regret theory and outranking methods for multicriteria decision making under imprecise information. Theory and Decision, 65(1), 45–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pergher, I., Frej, E. A., Roselli, L. R. P., & de Almeida, A. T. (2020). Integrating simulation and FITradeoff method for scheduling rules selection in job-shop production systems. International Journal of Production Economics, 227, 107669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pizzagalli, D. A. (2007). Electroencephalography and high-density electrophysiological source localization. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 56–84). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsøy, T. Z., Skov, M., Christensen, M. K., & Stahlhut, C. (2018). Frontal brain asymmetry and willingness to pay. Frontiers in neuroscience, 12, 138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedl, R., Davis, F. D., & Hevner, A. (2014). Towards a NeuroIS research methodology: intensifying the discussion on methods, tools, and measurement. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roselli, L. R. P., Frej, E. A., de Almeida, A. T. (2018a). 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. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 315.

  • Roselli, L .R .P., Frej, E. A., de Almeida, A. T. (2018b). Improving graphical visualization in the FITradeoff DSS using neuroscience experiment. In 2018 INFORMS International Conference. Proceedings of the 2018 INFORMS International Conference.

  • Roselli, L. R. P., Pereira, L. S, Silva, A. L. C. L., de Almeida, A. T., Morais, D. C., Costa, A. P. C. S. (2019b). Neuroscience experiment applied to investigate decision-maker behavior in the tradeoff elicitation procedure. Annals of Operations Research, 1–18.

  • Roselli, L. R. P., de Almeida, A. T., & Frej, E. A. (2019a). Decision neuroscience for improving data visualization of decision support in the FITradeoff method. Operational Research, 19(4), 933–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roselli, L. R. P., de Almeida, A. T. (2020b). Improvements in the FITradeoff decision support system for ranking order problematic based in a behavioral study with NeuroIS tools. In Proceedings of the NeuroIS Retreat 2020.

  • Roselli, L. R. P., & de Almeida, A. T. (2020a). Analysis of graphical visualizations for multi-criteria decision making in FITradeoff method using a decision neuroscience experiment. Lecture notes in business information processing. Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, I. M., Roselli, L. R. P., da Silva, A. L. G., & Alencar, L. H. (2020). A supplier selection model for a wholesaler and retailer company based on Fitradeoff Multicriteria method. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8796282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, M. M., de Gusmão, A. P. H., de Andrade, C. T. A., & Silva, W. (2019). The integration of VFT and FITradeoff multicriteria method for the selection of WCM projects. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC) pp. 1513–1517.

  • Souza, G. D. S. E., & Gomes, E. G. (2015). Improving agricultural economic efficiency in Brazil. International Transactions in Operational Research, 22(2), 329–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trepel, C., Fox, C. R., & Poldrack, R. A. (2005). Prospect theory on the brain? Toward a cognitive neuroscience of decision under risk. Cognitive Brain Research, 23(1), 34–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Noordt, S. J. R., Desjardins, J. A., Gogo, C. E. T., Tekok-kilic, A., & Segalowitz, S. J. (2017). Cognitive control in the eye of the beholder: Electrocortical theta and alpha modulation during response preparation in a cued saccade task. NeuroImage, 145, 82–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallenius, H., & Wallenius, J. (2020). Implications of world mega trends for MCDM research. In S. Ben Amor, A. de Almeida, J. de Miranda, & E. Aktas (Eds.), Advanced studies in multi-criteria decision making (pp. 1–10). Chapman and Hall/CRC Series in Operations Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, E. Q., Deng, P. Y., Qu, X. Y., Tang, Z., Zhang, W. M., Zhu, L. M., Gui-Rong Zhou, H. R., & Sheng, R. S. F. (2021). Detecting fatigue status of pilots based on deep learning network using EEG signals. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, 13(3), 575–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xia, W., & Wu, Z. (2007). Supplier selection with multiple criteria in volume discount environments. Omega, 35, 494–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., Bachmann, P., Schilling, T. M., Naumann, E., Schaechinger, H., & Larra, M. F. (2018). Emotional stress regulation: The role of relative frontal alpha asymmetry in shaping the stress response. Biological Psychology, 138, 231–239.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work had partial support from the Brazilian Research Council (CNPq) and Foundation of Support in Science and Technology of the State of Pernambuco (FACEPE).

Funding

The work received funding of CNPq [Grant 308531/2015-9] and Facepe (Grants APQ-0370-3.08/14 and APQ-0484-3.08/17).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CDSID - Center for Decision Systems and Information Development, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Av. Acadêmico Hélio Ramos, s/n – Cidade Universitária, Recife, PE, 50740-530, Brazil

    Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli & Adiel Teixeira de Almeida

Authors
  1. Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to study design and preparation of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Consent to participate and published

Terms of Consent which are signed by the participants are available by request in lrpr@cdsid.org.br. After sign the term the participants consent that phycological variables monitored during the experiment can be used to research. However, their personal information cannot be published.

Ethics approval

The study is approved by the Ethical Committee in Research of the Federal University of Pernambuco with CAAE (“Certificado de Apresentação e Aprecição Ética”—Certificate of Presentation and Ethical Appreciation) number 31065820.5.0000.5208.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Tables 2, 3

Table 2 Theta Values—Channel F3
Full size table
Table 3 Alpha Values—Channel P7
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

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 312, 1197–1219 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04495-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04495-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation