Soft Computing

, Volume 21, Issue 11, pp 3037–3050 | Cite as

Soft consensus measures in group decision making using unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information

  • F. J. Cabrerizo
  • R. Al-Hmouz
  • A. Morfeq
  • A. S. Balamash
  • M. A. Martínez
  • E. Herrera-Viedma
Methodologies and Application


An important question in group decision-making situations is how to estimate the consensus achieved within the group of decision makers. Dictionary meaning of consensus is a general and unanimous agreement among a group of individuals. However, most of the approaches deal with a more realistic situation of partial agreement. Defining a partial agreement of decision makers as a consensus up to some degree, the following question is how to obtain that soft degree of consensus. To do so, different approaches, in which the decision makers express their opinions by using symmetrical and uniformly distributed linguistic term sets, have been proposed. However, there exist situations in which the opinions are represented using unbalanced fuzzy linguistic term sets, in which the linguistic terms are not uniform and symmetrically distributed around the midterm. The aim of this paper was to study how to adapt the existing approaches obtaining soft consensus measures to handle group decision-making situations in which unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information is used. In addition, the advantages and drawbacks of these approaches are analyzed.


Group decision making Consensus Unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information 



This Project was funded by King Abdulaziz University (KAU), under Grant No. (27-135-35/HiCi). The authors, therefore, acknowledge technical and financial support of KAU.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. Alonso S, Chiclana F, Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Alcalá-Fdez J, Porcel C (2008) A consistency-based procedure to estimate missing pairwise preference relations. Int J Intell Syst 23:155–175CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso S, Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2013) A linguistic consensus model for web 2.0 communities. Appl Soft Comput 13:149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Arieh D, Chen Z (2006) Linguistic-labels aggregation and consensus measure for autocratic decision making using group recommendations. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 36:558–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bordogna G, Fedrizzi M, Pasi G (1997) A linguistic modelling of consensus in group decision making based on OWA operators. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 27:126–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler CT, Rothstein A (2006) On conflict and consensus: a handbook on formal consensus decision making. Food Not Bombs Publishing, Takoma ParkGoogle Scholar
  6. Cabrerizo FJ, Alonso S, Herrera-Viedma E (2009) A consensus model for group decision making problems with unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 8:109–131Google Scholar
  7. Cabrerizo FJ, Heradio R, Pérez IJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010a) A selection process based on additive consistency to deal with incomplete fuzzy linguistic information. J Univers Comput Sci 16:62–81Google Scholar
  8. Cabrerizo FJ, Moreno JM, Pérez IJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010b) Analyzing consensus approaches in fuzzy group decision making: advantages and drawbacks. Soft Comput 14:451–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cabrerizo FJ, Pérez IJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010c) Managing the consensus in group decision making in an unbalanced fuzzy linguistic context with incomplete information. Knowl Based Syst 23:169–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E, Pedrycz W (2013) A method based on pso and granular computing of linguistic information to solve group decision making problems defined in heterogeneous contexts. Eur J Oper Res 230:624–633MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Cabrerizo FJ, Ureña R, Pedrycz W, Herrera-Viedma E (2014) Building consensus in group decision making with an allocation of information granularity. Fuzzy Sets Syst 255:115–127MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Cabrerizo FJ, Chiclana F, Al-Hmouz R, Morfeq A, Balamash AS, Herrera-Viedma E (2015a) Fuzzy decision making and consensus: challenges. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 29:1109–1118MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cabrerizo FJ, Morente-Molinera JA, Pérez IJ, López-Gijón J, Herrera-Viedma E (2015b) A decision support system to develop a quality management in academic digital libraries. Inf Sci 323:48–58MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attributive decision making: theory and its applications. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chiclana F, Zhou SM (2013) Type-reduction of general type-2 fuzzy sets: the type-1 OWA approach. Int J Intell Syst 28:505–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chiclana F, Tapia-García JM, Del Moral MJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2013) A statistical comparative study of different similarity measures of consensus in group decision making. Inf Sci 221:110–123MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. D’Aniello G, Loia V, Orciuoli F (2015a) Employing fuzzy consensus for assessing reliability of sensor data in situation awareness frameworks. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, pp 2591–2596Google Scholar
  18. D’Aniello G, Loia V, Orciuoli F (2015b) A multi-agent fuzzy consensus model in a situation awareness framework. Appl Soft Comput 30:430–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deza MM, Deza E (2009) Encyclopedia of distances. Springer, BerlinCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Dong YC, Herrera-Viedma E (2015) Consistency-driven automatic methodology to set interval numerical scales of 2-tuple linguistic term sets and its use in the linguistic GDM with preference relations. IEEE Trans Cybern 45:780–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dong YC, Hong WC, Xu Y (2013a) Measuring consistency of linguistic preference relations: a 2-tuple linguistic approach. Soft Comput 17:2117–2130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dong YC, Zhang GQ, Hong WC, Yu S (2013b) Linguistic computational model based on 2-tuples and intervals. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 21:1006–1018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dong YC, Li CC, Herrera F (2015a) An optimization-based approach to adjusting unbalanced linguistic preference relations to obtain a required consistency level. Inf Sci 292:27–38MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Dong YC, Li CC, Xu YF, Gu X (2015b) Consensus-based group decision making under multi-granular unbalanced 2-tuple linguistic preference relations. Group Decis Negot 24:217–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dong YC, Wu Y, Zhang H, Zhang G (2015c) Multi-granular unbalanced linguistic distribution assessments with interval symbolic proportions. Knowl Based Syst 82:139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Estrella FJ, Espinilla M, Martínez L (2014) Fuzzy linguistic olive oil sensory evaluation model based on unbalanced linguistic scales. J Mult Valued Log Soft Comput 22:501–520Google Scholar
  27. Fodor J, Roubens M (1994) Fuzzy preference modelling and multicriteria decision support. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Herrera F, Martínez L (2000) 2-Tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 8:746–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Herrera F, Martínez L (2001) A model based on linguistic 2-tuples for dealing with multigranularity hierarchical linguistic contexts in multiexpert decision-making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 31:227–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay JL (1996a) Direct approach processes in group decision making using linguistic OWA operators. Fuzzy Sets Syst 79:175–190MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay JL (1996b) A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments. Fuzzy Sets Syst 78:73–87MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay JL (1997a) Linguistic measures based on fuzzy coincidence for reaching consensus in group decision making. Int J Approx Reason 16:309–334CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay JL (1997b) A rational consensus model in group decision making using linguistic assessments. Fuzzy Sets Syst 88:31–49CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Martínez L (2008) A fuzzy linguistic methodology to deal with unbalanced linguistic term sets. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 16:354–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F, Chiclana F (2002) A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 32:394–402Google Scholar
  36. Herrera-Viedma E, Cabrerizo FJ, Kacprzyk J, Pedrycz W (2014) A review of soft consensus models in a fuzzy environment. Inf Fusion 17:4–13Google Scholar
  37. Herrera-Viedma E, López-Herrera AG (2007) A model of information retrieval system with unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information. Int J Intell Syst 22:1197–1214CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Jiang L, Liu H, Cai J (2015) The power average operator for unbalanced linguistic term sets. Inf Fusion 22:85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kacprzyk J (1987) On some fuzzy cores and ‘soft’ consensus measures in group decision making. In: Bezdek JC (ed) The analysis of fuzzy information. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 119–130Google Scholar
  40. Kacprzyk J, Fedrizzi M (1986) ‘Soft’ consensus measures for monitoring real consensus reaching process under fuzzy preferences. Control Cybern 15:309–323zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. Kacprzyk J, Fedrizzi M, Nurmi H (1992) Group decision making and consensus under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority. Fuzzy Sets Syst 49:21–31MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Massanet S, Riera JV, Torrens J, Herrera-Viedma E (2014) A new linguistic computational model based on discrete fuzzy numbers for computing with words. Inf Sci 258:277–290MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Mata F, Pérez LG, Zhou SM, Chiclana F (2014) Type-1 OWA methodology to consensus reaching processes in multi-granular linguistic contexts. Knowl Based Syst 58:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Morente-Molinera JA, Pérez IJ, Ureña MR, Herrera-Viedma E (2015) On multi-granular fuzzy linguistic modelling in group decision making problems: a systematic review and future trends. Knowl Based Syst 74:49–60CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010) A mobile decision support system for dynamic group decision making problems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 40:1244–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Alonso S, Herrera-Viedma E (2014a) A new consensus model for group decision making problems with non homogeneous experts. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 44:494–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Morente-Molinera JA, Ureña R, Herrera-Viedma E (2014b) Reaching consensus in digital libraries: a linguistic approach. In: Second international conference on information technology and quantitative management (ITQM 2014), pp 449–458Google Scholar
  48. Pérez-Asurmendi P, Chiclana F (2014) Linguistic majorities with difference in support. Appl Soft Comput 18:196–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tapia-García JM, del Moral MJ, Martínez MA, Herrera-Viedma E (2012) A consensus model for group decision making problems with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations. Expert Syst Appl 39:10,022–10,030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tejada-Lorente A, Porcel C, Peis E, Sanz R, Herrera-Viedma E (2014) A quality based recommender system to disseminate information in a University Digital Library. Inf Sci 261:52–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ureña MR, Morente-Molinera JA, Herrera-Viedma E (2015) Managing incomplete preference relations in decision making: a review and future trends. Inf Sci 302:14–32MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang B, Liang J, Qian Y, Dang C (2015a) A normalized numerical scaling method for the unbalanced multi-granular linguistic sets. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 23:221–243Google Scholar
  53. Wang J, Wang D, Zhang H, Chen X (2015b) Multi-criteria group decision making method based on interval 2-tuple linguistic informaiton and Choque integral aggregation operators. Soft Comput 19:389–405CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. Wu J, Chiclana F (2015) Trust based consensus model for social network in an incomplete linguistic information context. Appl Soft Comput 35:827–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 18:183–190CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. Yager RR, Filev DP (1994) Parameterized and-like and or-like OWA operators. Int J Gen Syst 22:297–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  58. Zadeh LA (1975a) The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part I. Inf Sci 8:199–249CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. Zadeh LA (1975b) The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part II. Inf Sci 8:301–357CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. Zadeh LA (1975c) The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part III. Inf Sci 9:43–80CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. Zadeh LA (1983) A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages. Comput Math Appl 9:149–184MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. Zhou SM, Chiclana F, John R, Garibaldi J (2008) Type-1 OWA operators for aggregating uncertain information with uncertain weights induced by type-2 linguistic quantifiers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 159:3281–3296Google Scholar
  63. Zhou SM, Chiclana F, John R, Garibaldi J (2011) Alpha-level aggregation: a practical approach to type-1 OWA operation for aggregating uncertain information with applications to breast cancer treatments. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 23:1455–1468CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. J. Cabrerizo
    • 1
  • R. Al-Hmouz
    • 2
  • A. Morfeq
    • 2
  • A. S. Balamash
    • 2
  • M. A. Martínez
    • 3
  • E. Herrera-Viedma
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Software Engineering and Computer SystemsUniversidad Nacional de Educación a DistanciaMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringKing Abdulaziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Department of Social Services and WorkUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain
  4. 4.Department of Computer Science and Artificial IntelligenceUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations