Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Role of honesty and confined interpersonal influence in modelling predilections

  • Methodologies and Application
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Classical models of decision-making do not incorporate for the role of influence and honesty that affects the process. This paper develops on the theory of influence in social network analysis. We study the role of influence and honesty of individual experts on collective outcomes. It is assumed that experts have the tendency to improve their initial predilection for an alternative, over the rest, if they interact with one another. It is suggested that this revised predilection may not be proposed with complete honesty by the expert. Degree of honesty is computed from the preference relation provided by the experts. This measure is dependent on average fuzziness in the relation and its disparity from an additive reciprocal relation. Moreover, an algorithm is introduced to cater for incompleteness in the adjacency matrix of interpersonal influences. This is done by analysing the information on how the expert has influenced others and how others have influenced the expert.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Beg I, Rahid T (2017) Modelling uncertainties in multi-criteria decision making using distance measure and TOPSIS for hesitant fuzzy sets. J Artif Intell Soft Comput Res 7(2):103–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Benferhat S, Bouraoui Z, Chaudhry H, Rahim MS, Tabia K, Telli A (2016) Characterizing non-defeated repairs in inconsistent lightweight ontologies. In: 2016 12th international conference on signal-image technology & internet-based systems (SITIS). IEEE, pp 282–287

  • Bezdek J, Bonnie S, Spillman R (1978) A fuzzy relation space for group decision theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1(4):255–268

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Capuano N, Chiclana F, Fujita H, Viedma EH, Loia V (2018) Fuzzy group decision making with incomplete information guided by social influence. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(3):1704–1718

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhry H, Karim T, Abdul Rahim S, BenFerhat S (2017). Automatic annotation of traditional dance data using motion features. In: 2017 international conference on digital arts, media and technology (ICDAMT). IEEE, pp 254–258

  • Chiclana F, Herrera-Viedma E, Francisco H, Alonso S (2007) Some induced ordered weighted averaging operators and their use for solving group decision-making problems based on fuzzy preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 182(1):383–399

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • DeGroot MH (1974) Reaching a consensus. J Am Stat Assoc 69:118–121

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Friedkin NE, Johnsen EC (1999) Social influence networks and opinion change. Adv Group Process 16(1):1–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Giles R (1976) Łukasiewicz logic and fuzzy set theory. Int J Man Mach Stud 8(3):313–327

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hannu N (1981) Approaches to collective decision making with fuzzy preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 6(3):249–259

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F, Francisco C, Luque M (2004) Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 154(1):98–109

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • John S, Carrington PJ (2011) The SAGE handbook of social network analysis. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Khalid A, Beg I (2019) Soft pedal and influence-based decision modelling. Int J Fuzzy Syst. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-018-00600-y

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell HB, Estrakh DD (1997) A modified OWA operator and its use in lossless DPCM image compression. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 5(04):429–436

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez LG, Mata F, Chiclana F, Kou G, Herrera-Viedma E (2016) Modelling influence in group decision making. Soft Comput 20(4):1653–1665

    Google Scholar 

  • Qian L, Liao X, Liu J (2017) A social ties-based approach for group decision-making problems with incomplete additive preference relations. Knowl-Based Syst 119:68–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegfried W (1983) A general concept of fuzzy connectives, negations and implications based on t-norms and t-conorms. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(1–3):115–134

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley W, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis: methods and applications, 8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tanino T (1984) Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 12(2):117–131

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1983) Quantifiers in the formulation of multiple objective decision functions. Inf Sci 31(2):107–139

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 18(1):183–190

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (2003) Induced aggregation operators. Fuzzy Sets Syst 137(1):59–69

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR, Dimitar FP (1999) Induced ordered weighted averaging operators. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet Part B (Cybernet) 29(2):141–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1983) A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages. Comput Math Appl 9(1):149–184

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Mathematics and Statistical Sciences, Lahore School of Economics, Lahore, 53200, Pakistan

    Asma Khalid & Ismat Beg

Authors
  1. Asma Khalid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ismat Beg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asma Khalid.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Research does not directly involve human participants. Informed consent is ensured.

Additional information

Communicated by V. Loia.

Publisher’s Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khalid, A., Beg, I. Role of honesty and confined interpersonal influence in modelling predilections. Soft Comput 24, 1497–1509 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03981-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03981-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation