Minimum-Cost Consensus Model Considering Trust Loss

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Network Large-Scale Decision-Making

Part of the book series: Uncertainty and Operations Research ((UOR))

  • 74 Accesses

Abstract

The consensus-reaching process (CRP) is an effective tool for reducing differences of opinion. In general, the costs and resources associated with the CRP are limited. Therefore, the concept of minimum-cost consensus (MCC) has been proposed and used widely in various group decision-making contexts. As an important resource for influencing decision-making, trust provides a common-sense perception that the opinion of a high-trust DM is considered to be widely recognized by others. We hold that the DM with high trust but low consensus has the right to reduce the consensus cost by voluntarily losing some trust. Consequently, an improved MCC model considering trust loss is developed. Finally, we present a numerical example to illustrate the feasibility of the proposed consensus model. A comparative analysis is conducted to explore the influence of trust loss on the CRP.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 93.08
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
EUR 117.69
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Du, Z. J., Yu, S. M., & Xu, X. H. (2020). Managing noncooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision-making: Integration of independent and supervised consensus-reaching models. Information Sciences, 531, 119–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Palomares, I., Martínez, L., & Herrera, F. (2014). A consensus model to detect and manage noncooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 22(3), 516–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wu, Z., & Xu, J. (2016). Managing consistency and consensus in group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Omega, 65, 28–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Xu, X. H., Du, Z. J., Chen, X. H., & Cai, C. G. (2019). Confidence consensus-based model for large-scale group decision making: A novel approach to managing non-cooperative behaviors. Information Sciences, 477, 410–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Xu, X. H., Du, Z. J., & Chen, X. H. (2015). Consensus model for multi-criteria large-group emergency decision making considering non-cooperative behaviors and minority opinions. Decision Support Systems, 79, 150–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wu, J., Chiclana, F., Fujita, H., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2017). A visual interaction consensus model for social network group decision making with trust propagation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 122, 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wu, J., Chiclana, F., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015). Trust based consensus model for social network in an incomplete linguistic information context. Applied Soft Computing, 35, 827–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dong, Y., Ding, Z., Martínez, L., & Herrera, F. (2017). Managing consensus based on leadership in opinion dynamics. Information Sciences, 397, 187–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang, G., Dong, Y., Xu, Y., & Li, H. (2011). Minimum-cost consensus models under aggregation operators. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 41(6), 1253–1261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Labella, Á., Liu, H., Rodríguez, R. M., & Martínez, L. (2020). A cost consensus metric for consensus reaching processes based on a comprehensive minimum cost model. European Journal of Operational Research, 281(2), 316–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tang, M., Liao, H., Xu, J., Streimikiene, D., & Zheng, X. (2020). Adaptive consensus reaching process with hybrid strategies for large-scale group decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 282(3), 957–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yu, S. M., Du, Z. J., Lin, X. D., Luo, H. Y., & Wang, J. Q. (2020). A stochastic dominance-based approach for hotel selection under probabilistic linguistic environment. Mathematics, 8(9), 1525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chao, X., Dong, Y., Kou, G., & Peng, Y. (2022). How to determine the consensus threshold in group decision making: A method based on efficiency benchmark using benefit and cost insight. Annals of Operations Research, 316(1), 143–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Xu, W., Chen, X., Dong, Y., & Chiclana, F. (2021). Impact of decision rules and non-cooperative behaviors on minimum consensus cost in group decision making. Group Decision and Negotiation, 30(6), 1239–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhijiao Du .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Du, Z., Yu, S. (2023). Minimum-Cost Consensus Model Considering Trust Loss. In: Social Network Large-Scale Decision-Making. Uncertainty and Operations Research. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7794-9_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation