A dynamic trust consensus model considering individual overconfidence

被引:21
作者
Hao, Tiantian [1 ]
Cheng, Dong [2 ]
Cheng, Faxin [1 ]
机构
[1] Jiangsu Univ, Sch Management, Zhenjiang 212013, Peoples R China
[2] Donghua Univ, Glorious Sun Sch Business & Management, Shanghai 200051, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Group decision -making; Consensus; Dynamic trust; Individual overconfidence; Hesitant intuitionistic fuzzy preference; relations; GROUP DECISION-MAKING; MINIMUM ADJUSTMENT CONSENSUS; SOCIAL NETWORK; FEEDBACK MECHANISM; SELF-CONFIDENCE; PROSPECT-THEORY; SELECTION; EXPERTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110503
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
In the consensus reaching process (CRP) under the dynamic trust network, decision-makers' (DMs') self-confidence can be regarded as the psychological expression of self-estimation. However, their overconfidence usually has a negative impact on the CRP, even leading to the failure of group decision -making (GDM). To address the issue, we propose a dynamic trust consensus model considering overconfidence under the hesitant intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations (HIFPRs). To determine dynamic trust relationships between multi-attribute DMs, an interactive evaluation-based method is proposed, and thereafter, DMs' weights are allocated based on the trust degree. In the CRP considering overconfidence, DM's self-confidence level is defined to detect overconfidence, and feedback mechanisms are constructed for different cases. If overconfident DMs are identified, their trust relationships and self-confidence levels will be adjusted to facilitate the CRP; otherwise, DMs' HIFPRs will be adjusted. A numerical example, comparative analysis, and discussions are used to illustrate the validity of the proposed model. Comparisons reveal that managing overconfidence by adjusting DMs' interactive evaluation and self-confidence levels in the dynamic trust network can effectively improve the group consensus degree.(c) 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]   Investor Overconfidence, Firm Valuation, and Corporate Decisions [J].
Adebambo, Biljana N. ;
Yan, Xuemin .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2018, 64 (11) :5349-5369
[2]   Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach [J].
Altuzarra, Alfredo ;
Maria Moreno-Jimenez, Jose ;
Salvador, Manuel .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2010, 58 (06) :1755-1773
[3]   Collective decision making reduces metacognitive control and increases error rates, particularly for overconfident individuals [J].
Blanchard, Matthew D. ;
Jackson, Simon A. ;
Kleitman, Sabina .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2020, 33 (03) :348-375
[4]   Maximum satisfaction consensus with budget constraints considering individual tolerance and compromise limit behaviors [J].
Cheng, Dong ;
Yuan, Yuxiang ;
Wu, Yong ;
Hao, Tiantian ;
Cheng, Faxin .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2022, 297 (01) :221-238
[5]   Reaching a minimum adjustment consensus in social network group decision-making [J].
Cheng, Dong ;
Cheng, Faxin ;
Zhou, Zhili ;
Wu, Yong .
INFORMATION FUSION, 2020, 59 :30-43
[6]   Modeling the minimum cost consensus problem in an asymmetric costs context [J].
Cheng, Dong ;
Zhou, Zhili ;
Cheng, Faxin ;
Zhou, Yanfang ;
Xie, Yujing .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2018, 270 (03) :1122-1137
[7]   Deriving heterogeneous experts weights from incomplete linguistic preference relations based on uninorm consistency [J].
Cheng, Dong ;
Zhou, Zhili ;
Cheng, Faxin ;
Wang, Juan .
KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS, 2018, 150 :150-165
[8]   Social network community analysis based large-scale group decision making approach with incomplete fuzzy preference relations [J].
Chu, Junfeng ;
Wang, Yingming ;
Liu, Xinwang ;
Liu, Yicong .
INFORMATION FUSION, 2020, 60 :98-120
[9]   Loss Aversion with a State-Dependent Reference Point [J].
De Giorgi, Enrico G. ;
Post, Thierry .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2011, 57 (06) :1094-1110
[10]   NOISE TRADER RISK IN FINANCIAL-MARKETS [J].
DELONG, JB ;
SHLEIFER, A ;
SUMMERS, LH ;
WALDMANN, RJ .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1990, 98 (04) :703-738