Skip to main content
Top

02-08-2024 | Research

A Consensus Model with Non-Cooperative Behavior Adaptive Management Based on Cognitive Psychological State Computation in Large-Scale Group Decision

Authors: Yuetong Chen, Mingrui Zhou, Fengming Liu

Published in: Cognitive Computation

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Social cognition proposed that individual cognitive psychology was closely related to decision-making behavior. The heterogeneity of individual cognitive psychology has been ignored in large-scale decision-making. This research proposes a novel consensus decision model based on cognitive psychological state computation. Effective trust, cognitive trust, and opinion similarity are integrated to construct a fusion relationship network, and Louvain algorithm is used to divide communities. On this basis, non-cooperative individuals are identified. We quantify and classify individual cognitive psychological states by introducing attitude-belief factors. In this process, the cognitive trust and cognitive expression involved have fuzziness and uncertainty, which are quantified and computed by intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. Considering the difference in cognitive dissonance among non-cooperative individuals with different cognitive states, an adaptive feedback mechanism and trust renewal rule are proposed. The simulation results show that, on the one hand, the consensus model in this paper has a high timeliness. On the other hand, among the four types of cognitive psychological state, the non-cooperative individual with higher attitude factor and lower belief factor had higher management efficiency and consensus-reaching speed.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literature
1.
go back to reference Hassani H, Razavi-Far R, Saif M, et al. Classical dynamic consensus and opinion dynamics models: A survey of recent trends and methodologies [J]. Information Fusion. 2022;88:22–40.CrossRef Hassani H, Razavi-Far R, Saif M, et al. Classical dynamic consensus and opinion dynamics models: A survey of recent trends and methodologies [J]. Information Fusion. 2022;88:22–40.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Tang G, Long J, Gu X, et al. Interval type-2 fuzzy programming method for risky multicriteria decision-making with heterogeneous relationship [J]. Information Science. 2022;584:184–211.CrossRef Tang G, Long J, Gu X, et al. Interval type-2 fuzzy programming method for risky multicriteria decision-making with heterogeneous relationship [J]. Information Science. 2022;584:184–211.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Hua Z, Jing X, Martinez L. Consensus reaching for social network group decision making with ELICIT information: a perspective from the complex network [J]. Information Science. 2023;627:71–96.CrossRef Hua Z, Jing X, Martinez L. Consensus reaching for social network group decision making with ELICIT information: a perspective from the complex network [J]. Information Science. 2023;627:71–96.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Liang H, Kou G, Dong Y, et al. Consensus reaching with minimum cost of informed individuals and time constraints in large-scale group decision-making [J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems. 2022;30(11):4991–5004.CrossRef Liang H, Kou G, Dong Y, et al. Consensus reaching with minimum cost of informed individuals and time constraints in large-scale group decision-making [J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems. 2022;30(11):4991–5004.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Herrera-Viedma E, Palomares I, Li C, et al. Revisiting fuzzy and linguistic decision making: scenarios and challenges for making wiser decisions in a better way [J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems. 2021;51(1):191–208.CrossRef Herrera-Viedma E, Palomares I, Li C, et al. Revisiting fuzzy and linguistic decision making: scenarios and challenges for making wiser decisions in a better way [J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems. 2021;51(1):191–208.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Chao X, Kou G, Peng Y, et al. Large-scale group decision-making with non-cooperative behaviors and heterogeneous preferences: an application in financial inclusion[J]. European Journal Operational Research. 2021;288(1):271–93.MathSciNetCrossRef Chao X, Kou G, Peng Y, et al. Large-scale group decision-making with non-cooperative behaviors and heterogeneous preferences: an application in financial inclusion[J]. European Journal Operational Research. 2021;288(1):271–93.MathSciNetCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Li S, Rodriguez MR, Wei C. Managing manipulative and non-cooperative behaviors in large scale group decision making based on a WeChat-like interaction network[J]. Information Fusion. 2021;75:1–15.CrossRef Li S, Rodriguez MR, Wei C. Managing manipulative and non-cooperative behaviors in large scale group decision making based on a WeChat-like interaction network[J]. Information Fusion. 2021;75:1–15.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Gao Y, Zhang Z. Consensus reaching with non-cooperative behavior management for personalized individual semantics-based social network group decision making[J]. Journal of the Operationa Research Society. 2022;73(11):2518–35.CrossRef Gao Y, Zhang Z. Consensus reaching with non-cooperative behavior management for personalized individual semantics-based social network group decision making[J]. Journal of the Operationa Research Society. 2022;73(11):2518–35.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Meng F, Zhao D, Zhang X. A fair consensus adjustment mechanism for large-scale group decision making in term of Gini coefficient[J]. Engineering Application of Artificial Intelligence. 2023;126.CrossRef Meng F, Zhao D, Zhang X. A fair consensus adjustment mechanism for large-scale group decision making in term of Gini coefficient[J]. Engineering Application of Artificial Intelligence. 2023;126.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Liang X, Guo J, Liu P. A large-scale group decision-making model with no consensus threshold based on social network analysis[J]. Information Science. 2022;612:361–83.CrossRef Liang X, Guo J, Liu P. A large-scale group decision-making model with no consensus threshold based on social network analysis[J]. Information Science. 2022;612:361–83.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Xiong K, Dong Y, Zha Q. A large-scale consensus model to manage non-cooperative behaviors in group decision making: A perspective based on historical data[J]. Expert Systems With Applications, 2023,214. Xiong K, Dong Y, Zha Q. A large-scale consensus model to manage non-cooperative behaviors in group decision making: A perspective based on historical data[J]. Expert Systems With Applications, 2023,214.
12.
go back to reference Yang G, Wang X, Ding R, et al. Managing non-cooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision making based on trust relationships and confidence levels of decision makers[J]. Information Fusion, 2023,97. Yang G, Wang X, Ding R, et al. Managing non-cooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision making based on trust relationships and confidence levels of decision makers[J]. Information Fusion, 2023,97.
13.
go back to reference Yan B, Wang Y, Xia W, et al. Novel consensus-reaching model in the social network environment for large-group emergency decision-making: an approach to managing non-cooperative behaviors[J]. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2023;56(8):8609–45.CrossRef Yan B, Wang Y, Xia W, et al. Novel consensus-reaching model in the social network environment for large-group emergency decision-making: an approach to managing non-cooperative behaviors[J]. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2023;56(8):8609–45.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Román FJ, Colom R, Hillman CH, et al. Cognitive and neural architecture of decision making competence[J]. Neuroimage. 2019;199:172–83.CrossRef Román FJ, Colom R, Hillman CH, et al. Cognitive and neural architecture of decision making competence[J]. Neuroimage. 2019;199:172–83.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective[J]. Annual; Review of Psychology, 2001(1). Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective[J]. Annual; Review of Psychology, 2001(1).
16.
go back to reference Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the rationality of choice[J]. Science, 1980. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the rationality of choice[J]. Science, 1980.
17.
go back to reference Parayitam S, Dooley RS. Is too much cognitive conflict in strategic decision-making teams too bad?[J]. International Journal Conflict Management. 2011;22(4):342–57. Parayitam S, Dooley RS. Is too much cognitive conflict in strategic decision-making teams too bad?[J]. International Journal Conflict Management. 2011;22(4):342–57.
18.
go back to reference Dewberry C, Juanchich M, Narendran S. Decision-making competence in everyday life: the roles of general cognitive styles, decision-making styles and personality[J]. Personality and Individual Differences. 2013;55(7):783–8.CrossRef Dewberry C, Juanchich M, Narendran S. Decision-making competence in everyday life: the roles of general cognitive styles, decision-making styles and personality[J]. Personality and Individual Differences. 2013;55(7):783–8.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Busemeyer JR. Cognitive science contributions to decision science[J]. Cognition. 2015;135:43–6.CrossRef Busemeyer JR. Cognitive science contributions to decision science[J]. Cognition. 2015;135:43–6.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Ward E V, Dhami M K. Editorial: The aging decision-maker: advances in understanding the impact of cognitive change on decision-making[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2016,7. Ward E V, Dhami M K. Editorial: The aging decision-maker: advances in understanding the impact of cognitive change on decision-making[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2016,7.
21.
go back to reference Wang GH, Li XL, Zhou JL, et al. The influence of entrepreneurial team’s cognitive adaptability on its risk decision making[J]. Industrial Management Data Systems. 2020;120(2):329–49.CrossRef Wang GH, Li XL, Zhou JL, et al. The influence of entrepreneurial team’s cognitive adaptability on its risk decision making[J]. Industrial Management Data Systems. 2020;120(2):329–49.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Skagerlund K, Forsblad M, Tinghog G, et al. Decision-making competence and cognitive abilities: which abilities matter?[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2022,35(1). Skagerlund K, Forsblad M, Tinghog G, et al. Decision-making competence and cognitive abilities: which abilities matter?[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2022,35(1).
23.
go back to reference Beaudoin C, Beauchamp MH. Social cognition.[J]. Handbook of clinical neurology, 2020,173: 255–264. Beaudoin C, Beauchamp MH. Social cognition.[J]. Handbook of clinical neurology, 2020,173: 255–264.
24.
go back to reference Sallet J. On the evolutionary roots of human social cognition[J]. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 2022,137. Sallet J. On the evolutionary roots of human social cognition[J]. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 2022,137.
25.
go back to reference Cheng YH, Zhang X, Wang XJ, et al. Rethinking the development of technology-enhanced learning and the role of cognitive computing[J]. International Journal on Semantic and Information Systems. 2021;17(1):67–96.CrossRef Cheng YH, Zhang X, Wang XJ, et al. Rethinking the development of technology-enhanced learning and the role of cognitive computing[J]. International Journal on Semantic and Information Systems. 2021;17(1):67–96.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Wang Y. The application of computer-based multimedia technology in cognitive computing[J]. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022,2022. Wang Y. The application of computer-based multimedia technology in cognitive computing[J]. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022,2022.
27.
go back to reference Greenwood JD. Social cognition, social neuroscience, and evolutionary social psychology: what’s missing?[J]. Journal Theory Social Behaviour. 2019;49(2):161–78.MathSciNetCrossRef Greenwood JD. Social cognition, social neuroscience, and evolutionary social psychology: what’s missing?[J]. Journal Theory Social Behaviour. 2019;49(2):161–78.MathSciNetCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Yuan Y, Wang C, Cheng D, et al. Minimum conflict consensus models for group decision-making based on social network analysis considering non-cooperative behaviors[J]. Information Fusion, 2023,99. Yuan Y, Wang C, Cheng D, et al. Minimum conflict consensus models for group decision-making based on social network analysis considering non-cooperative behaviors[J]. Information Fusion, 2023,99.
29.
go back to reference Zhang HJ, Palomares I, Dong YC, et al. Managing non-cooperative behaviors in consensus-based multiple attribute group decision making: an approach based on social network analysis[J]. Knowledge-Based Systems. 2018;162:29–45.CrossRef Zhang HJ, Palomares I, Dong YC, et al. Managing non-cooperative behaviors in consensus-based multiple attribute group decision making: an approach based on social network analysis[J]. Knowledge-Based Systems. 2018;162:29–45.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Liu Y, Zhang X, Rodriguez RM, et al. Managing non-cooperative behaviors in consensus reaching processes: a comprehensive self-management weight generation mechanism[J]. Application Intelligence. 2024;54(3):2673–702.CrossRef Liu Y, Zhang X, Rodriguez RM, et al. Managing non-cooperative behaviors in consensus reaching processes: a comprehensive self-management weight generation mechanism[J]. Application Intelligence. 2024;54(3):2673–702.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Xing Y, Wu J, Chiclana F, et al. A bargaining game based feedback mechanism to support consensus in dynamic social network group decision making[J]. Information Fusion. 2023;93:363–82.CrossRef Xing Y, Wu J, Chiclana F, et al. A bargaining game based feedback mechanism to support consensus in dynamic social network group decision making[J]. Information Fusion. 2023;93:363–82.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Li Y, Kou G, Li G, et al. Consensus reaching process in large-scale group decision making based on bounded confidence and social network[J]. European Journal Operational Research. 2022;303(2):790–802.MathSciNetCrossRef Li Y, Kou G, Li G, et al. Consensus reaching process in large-scale group decision making based on bounded confidence and social network[J]. European Journal Operational Research. 2022;303(2):790–802.MathSciNetCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Yuan Y. Cognitive and neural mechanisms of users’ contextualized attitude transformation in the illusion of privacy empowerment paradox[D]. Huaqiao University, 2023. Yuan Y. Cognitive and neural mechanisms of users’ contextualized attitude transformation in the illusion of privacy empowerment paradox[D]. Huaqiao University, 2023.
34.
go back to reference Wickland R, Brehm JW. Perspectives on cognitive dissonance[J]. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1976. Wickland R, Brehm JW. Perspectives on cognitive dissonance[J]. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1976.
35.
go back to reference Wei J, Jia Y, Zhu H, et al. Users’ opinion evolution in dynamic networks based on cognitive dissonance[J]. Journal of Modern Information. 2023;05(43):104–13. Wei J, Jia Y, Zhu H, et al. Users’ opinion evolution in dynamic networks based on cognitive dissonance[J]. Journal of Modern Information. 2023;05(43):104–13.
36.
go back to reference Hinojosa AS. A review of cognitive dissonance theory in management research[J]. Journal Management. 2016;1(43):170–99. Hinojosa AS. A review of cognitive dissonance theory in management research[J]. Journal Management. 2016;1(43):170–99.
37.
go back to reference McGrath A. Dealing with dissonance: a review of cognitive dissonance reduction[J]. Social Personality Psychology Compass. 2017;11(12):1–17.CrossRef McGrath A. Dealing with dissonance: a review of cognitive dissonance reduction[J]. Social Personality Psychology Compass. 2017;11(12):1–17.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Simion CSS. Early interactions between orienting, visual sampling and decision making in facial preference[J]. Vision Research. 2006;20(46):3331–5.CrossRef Simion CSS. Early interactions between orienting, visual sampling and decision making in facial preference[J]. Vision Research. 2006;20(46):3331–5.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Harmon-Jones E, Gerdjikov T, Harmon-Jones C. The effect of induced compliance on relative left frontal cortical activity: a test of the action-based model of dissonance[J]. European Journal Social Psychology. 2010;1(8):35–45. Harmon-Jones E, Gerdjikov T, Harmon-Jones C. The effect of induced compliance on relative left frontal cortical activity: a test of the action-based model of dissonance[J]. European Journal Social Psychology. 2010;1(8):35–45.
41.
go back to reference Xu Z. Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators[J]. IEEE Transaction Fuzzy Systems. 2008;14(6):1179–87. Xu Z. Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators[J]. IEEE Transaction Fuzzy Systems. 2008;14(6):1179–87.
Metadata
Title
A Consensus Model with Non-Cooperative Behavior Adaptive Management Based on Cognitive Psychological State Computation in Large-Scale Group Decision
Authors
Yuetong Chen
Mingrui Zhou
Fengming Liu
Publication date
02-08-2024
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Cognitive Computation
Print ISSN: 1866-9956
Electronic ISSN: 1866-9964
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-024-10330-z

Premium Partner