A method of assigning a global preference index

• Authors: MACIEJEWSKI Wojciech , KORDECKI Wojciech
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The issue of decision-making has been examined based on the preferences of the entire population, when the preferences of a few subpopulations varying significantly in size are known. The purpose of assigning global preferences according to the coefficients proposed here was to avoid marginalising the preferences of the smaller subpopulations. The preference coefficients for the population have been assigned using a weighted arithmetic mean, where the weights are the square roots of the sizes of the subpopulations. This is similar to the voting system known as the “Jagiellonian compromise”. The statistical properties of these constants were presented in the context of decision making. These results have been illustrated by way of an example where the subpopulations exhibit significant differences, viz. students’ choice of an economics university in Lower Silesia, Poland.

Keywords

EN

decision process; decision making; university choice

• Publisher: Politechnika Wrocławska. Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej
• Journal: Operations Research and Decisions
• Year: 2017
• Volume: 27
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 59-75

Contributors

author

MACIEJEWSKI Wojciech

• University of Pedagogy Krakow, Institute of Politics, 30-084 Krakow, ul. Podchorążych 2, Poland

author

KORDECKI Wojciech

• The Witelon State University of Applied Sciences in Legnica, Faculty of Technical and Economic Science, 59-220 Legnica, ul. Sejmowa 5C, Poland

References

• BYSTRICKÝ R., Different approaches to weighted voting systems based on preferential positions, Kybernetika, 2012, 48, 536–549.
• CHAMBERLIN J.R., COURANT P.N., Representative deliberation and representative decisions. Proportional representation and the Borda rule, Am. Polit. Sci. Rev., 1983, 77 (3), 718–733.
• HART L.B., Faultless Facilitation. The New Complete Resource Guide for Team Leaders and Facilitators, Chapter 8. Multi-Voting: A Decision-Making Method, HRD Press, Amherst, MA, 1996, 129–134.
• HOETING J.A., MADIGAN D., RAFTERY A.E., VOLINSKY C.T., Bayesian model averaging. A tutorial, Stat. Sci., 1999, 140 (4), 382–417.
• LAPPÄNEN H., GRÖNROOS C., The hybrid consumer. Exploring the drivers of a new consumer behavior type, Technical Report 543, Hanken School of Economics, Department of Marketing, Helsinki 2009.
• LAU J., IOANNIDIS J.P., SCHMID C.H., Summing up evidence. One answer is not always enough, Lancet, 1998, 351, 123–127.
• MONROE B.L., Fully proportional representation, Am. Polit. Sci. Rev., 1995, 89 (4), 925–940.
• OSTASIEWICZ S., OSTASIEWICZ W., Means and their applications, Ann. Oper. Res., 2000, 97, 337–355.
• RATZER E., On the “Jagiellonian compromise” – voting in the European Union, 2006, URL http://www. inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/ear23/voting/voting.pdf. Accessed: 2015-12-19.
• ROGELBERG S.G., BARNES-FARRELL J.L., LOWE C.A., The stepladder technique. An alternative group structure facilitating effective decision making, J. Appl. Psych., 1992, 770 (5), 730–737.
• SŁOMCZYŃSKI W., ŻYCZKOWSKI K., Penrose voting system and optimal quota, Acta Phys. Polon. B, 2006, 37, 3133–3143.
• WANG X., GAO Z., GUO H., Delphi method for estimating uncertainty distributions, Information, Int. Inter. J., 2012, 150 (2), 449–460, URL http://orsc.edu.cn/online/100830.pdf
• ŻYCZKOWSKI K., SŁOMCZYŃSKI W., Square root voting system, optimal threshold and , [in:] Power, Voting, and Voting Power. 30 Years After, M.J. Holler, H. Nurmi (Eds.), Springer, Berlin 2013, 573–592.

Identifiers

DOI

10.5277/ord170204