Modeling the Maximum Perceived Utility Consensus Based on Prospect Theory
Group Decision and Negotiation, ISSN: 1572-9907, Vol: 33, Issue: 5, Page: 951-975
2024
- 9Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures9
- Readers9
Article Description
Expected utility consensus models aim to obtain a consensus solution with the maximum utility of the group. However, decision-makers (DMs) are often bounded rational in practice and their loss aversion behaviors have an important impact on the consensus-reaching, which may lead to a deviation between the actual decision and the theoretical solution. To solve this issue, we propose a maximum perceived utility consensus model based on prospect theory (MPUCM-PT) to maximize the perceived utility of the group under a budget constraint. The individual perceived utility is measured by the prospect value, and individual adjusted opinion is taken as an endogenous reference point. To explore the influence of different consensus levels on consensus modeling, we further develop a soft MPUCM-PT based on soft consensus measure. Then, upper and lower bounds of the optimal budget are given to provide a reference for setting a reasonable budget. Finally, the proposed consensus models are verified by the case of China’s Taihu Lake pollution control. Results show that, with the same level of budget, the utility satisfaction obtained by the MPUCM-PT is higher than that obtained by expected utility consensus models. Moreover, the group perceived utility based on prospect theory is also improved.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know