Group efficiency and individual fairness tradeoff in making wise decisions

被引:12
作者
Tang, Ming [1 ]
Liao, Huchang [2 ]
机构
[1] Dalian Univ Technol, Sch Econ & Management, Dalian 116024, Peoples R China
[2] Sichuan Univ, Business Sch, Chengdu 610064, Peoples R China
来源
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE | 2024年 / 124卷
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Group decision making; Collective intelligence; Minimum cost consensus; Efficiency and fairness; Altruistic behaviors; CONSENSUS MODEL; NONCOOPERATIVE BEHAVIORS; COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE; SOCIAL-INFLUENCE; WISDOM; COST; MINIMUM; FUZZY; INFORMATION; KNOWLEDGE;
D O I
10.1016/j.omega.2023.103015
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
In group decision making, the consensus model with minimum cost has been researched with the aim of improving group efficiency and saving resources. However, one limitation of the minimum cost consensus model is that the reach of consensus is usually at the expense of some group members. We consider two issues that we see as keys in group consensus: efficiency and fairness. We propose the price of fairness in the opinion revision process and give two kinds of fairness schemes. According to the individual's perception of inequity, we intro-duce inequity aversion parameters and classify experts into two types: experts with non-cooperative behaviors and with altruistic behaviors. Experts with altruistic behaviors will be allowed to contribute more than the recommended number of modifications. Then, we discuss how to achieve the tradeoff between efficiency and fairness. Furthermore, with the rapid development of social media, cloud, and e-government platforms, collective intelligence (CI), i.e., groups of individuals doing things collectively that seem intelligent, has been a hot topic. We expand our work to a crowd context with many individuals. We investigate how the opinion revision process and fairness schemes can influence the emergence of CI. Results suggest that the proportional fairness and max -min fairness have similar performance in stimulating CI. Moreover, the improvement of group accuracy is mainly related to two factors: the group consensus level of initial opinions and the relative distance between group aggregated opinion and the ground truth.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 77 条
  • [1] ADAMS JS, 1965, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V2, P267
  • [2] The distribution of initial estimates moderates the effect of social influence on the wisdom of the crowd
    Almaatouq, Abdullah
    Rahimian, M. Amin
    Burton, Jason W.
    Alhajri, Abdulla
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [3] TO CENTRALIZE OR NOT TO CENTRALIZE - THE EFFECTS OF UNCERTAINTY AND THREAT ON GROUP-STRUCTURE AND PERFORMANCE
    ARGOTE, L
    TURNER, ME
    FICHMAN, M
    [J]. ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1989, 43 (01) : 58 - 74
  • [4] Social learning strategies modify the effect of network structure on group performance
    Barkoczi, Daniel
    Galesic, Mirta
    [J]. NATURE COMMUNICATIONS, 2016, 7
  • [5] Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds
    Becker, Joshua
    Brackbill, Devon
    Centola, Damon
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2017, 114 (26) : E5070 - E5076
  • [6] Bell DE, 2009, STUD CHOICE WELF, P27, DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-79128-7_2
  • [7] Multi-criteria group consensus under linear cost opinion elasticity
    Ben-Arieh, D.
    Easton, T.
    [J]. DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 2007, 43 (03) : 713 - 721
  • [8] The Price of Fairness
    Bertsimas, Dimitris
    Farias, Vivek F.
    Trichakis, Nikolaos
    [J]. OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2011, 59 (01) : 17 - 31
  • [9] Is altruism evolutionarily stable?
    Bester, H
    Guth, W
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 1998, 34 (02) : 193 - 209
  • [10] Bezdek J. C., 1978, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, V1, P255, DOI 10.1016/0165-0114(78)90017-9