Group decision-making: Head-count versus intensity of preference

Socio-Economic Planning Sciences - Tập 41 - Trang 22-37 - 2007
Thomas L. Saaty1, Jen S. Shang1
1The Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA

Tài liệu tham khảo

Harsanyi, 1955, Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility, Journal of Political Economy, 63, 309, 10.1086/257678

Keeney, 1975, Group decision making using social welfare functions, Management Science, 22, 430, 10.1287/mnsc.22.4.430

Keeney, 1993

Brock, 1980, The problem of “utility weights” in group preference aggregation (in preference models), Operations Research, 28, 176, 10.1287/opre.28.1.176

Mirkin, 1985

Barbut, 1961, Does the majority ever rule? The curious operations of processes of rational decision in games and practical elections, Portfolio and Art News Annual, 4, 161

Arrow, 1963

Armstrong, 1982, Priority ranking and consensus formation: the case if ties, Management Science, 28, 638, 10.1287/mnsc.28.6.638

Cook, 1982, On the borda-kendall consensus method for priority ranking problems, Management Science, 28, 621, 10.1287/mnsc.28.6.621

Cook, 1985, Ordinal ranking with intensity of preference, Management Science, 31, 26, 10.1287/mnsc.31.1.26

Mueller, 1976, Public choice: a survey, Journal of Economic Literature, 14, 395

Plott, 1976, Axiomatic social choice theory: an overview and interpretation, American Journal of Political Science, 20, 511, 10.2307/2110686

MacKay, 1980

Saaty, 1977, A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234, 10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5

Saaty, 1980

Saaty, 2005, The possibility of group welfare functions, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 4, 67, 10.1142/S0219622005001453

Barro RJ. Bush's tax cuts: Reaganomics redux? Business Week online. January 20, 2003. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_03/b3816046.htm

Ferguson L. Racism unfortunately fact of real world. The Penn Online. October 2004. http://www.thepenn.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/11/416b1389a2bcc

Cohen C. Race preference in college admissions. Heritage Lecture #611. April 29, 1998. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/HL611.cfm

Bowen, 2000, The shape of the river: long-term consequences of considering race in college and university, Society, 37, 71

Flynn, 1999

Anonymous. Term limits debate and poll: do you support term limits? 2005. http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/term_limits.HTM

Aczel, 1983, Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgment, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 27, 93, 10.1016/0022-2496(83)90028-7

Aczel, 1986, On synthesis of judgments, Social-Economic Planning Sciences, 20, 333, 10.1016/0038-0121(86)90044-3

Saaty, 2005

O’Connor E. Technology plays central role in post-election 2000. December 13, 2000. http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/views/effect/2000/12/oconnor.pres.dec13/

Kenski, 2005, To I-vote or not to I-vote?, Social Science Computer Review, 23, 293, 10.1177/0894439305275851

Stromer-Galley, 2003, Voting and the public sphere: conversations on internet voting, Political Science and Politics, 36, 727, 10.1017/S1049096503003020

Rose, 2005, A global diffusion model of e-governance, Journal of Public Policy, 25, 5, 10.1017/S0143814X05000279

Lee-Kelley, 2003, E-government and social exclusion: an empirical study, Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 1, 1, 10.4018/jeco.2003100101

Expert Choice. http://www.expertchoice.com/customers/successstories.htm. 1501 Lee Highway, Suite 302, Arlington, VA 22209.

Davolt S. The man who knew too much: for up-and-coming Georgetown software developer, decision support software adds up. http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2000/08/07/smallb1.html

Peniwati K. Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods. Working paper, PPM Graduate School of Management, Jakarta, Indonesia 2004.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Socio-Economic Planning Sciences

Tập 41

22-37

Thông tin tác giả