Granular Computing

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 39–52 | Cite as

Emergency decision-making combining cumulative prospect theory and group decision-making

  • Wenjing Liu
  • Lei LiEmail author
Original Paper


With respect to the characteristic of risk and the potential evolvement of scenarios in emergency management analysis, this study proposes an emergency decision-making method with interval probability based on cumulative prospect theory and group decision-making. Under emergency risk environment, there is a tremendous need to consider decision-maker’s psychological behavior which affects the decision results. In addition, an emergency decision generally involves joint participation among departments, which inevitably brings about group decision-making. Therefore, aiming at decision problems in emergency management, this paper provides an algorithm of emergency group decision-making considering psychological behaviors. For illustration and verification, a numerical example and two comparisons are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of proposed method. The contribution of this study is characterized by three aspects. First, cumulative prospect theory is introduced to quantify the impact of psychological behaviors. Second, group decision-making is considered as a think tank, which makes the decision more persuasive than single-person methods. Third, this study proposes a novel intelligent optimization algorithm, plant growth simulation algorithm, to integrate the different individual evaluations.


Emergency management Cumulative prospect theory Group decision-making Interval probability Plant growth simulation algorithm 



Grateful acknowledgement is made to my supervisor Mr. Li who gave me considerable help by means of suggestion, comments and criticism. Meanwhile, the authors deeply appreciate the contribution to this paper made by editor and reviewers. Their comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches.


  1. Abul’Wafa AR (2011) A new heuristic approach for optimal reconfiguration in distribution systems. Electr Power Syst Res 81(2):282–289Google Scholar
  2. Bell DE (1985) Disappointment in decision making under uncertainty. Oper Res 33(1):1–27MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Bleichrodt H, Schmidt U, Zank H (2009) Additive utility in prospect theory. Manag Sci 55(5):863–873zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen SM, Chang TH (2001) Finding multiple possible critical paths using fuzzy PERT. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B Cybern 31(6):930–937Google Scholar
  5. Chen SM, Chien CY (2011) Parallelized genetic ant colony systems for solving the traveling salesman problem. Expert Syst Appl 38(4):3873–3883Google Scholar
  6. Chen SM, Chung NY (2006) Forecasting enrollments of students using fuzzy time series and genetic algorithms. Int J Inf Manage Sci 17(3):1–17zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen SM, Kao PY (2013) TAIEX forecasting based on fuzzy time series, particle swarm optimization techniques and support vector machines. Inf Sci 247(15):62–71MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen SM, Hong JA (2014a) Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision making based on ranking interval type-2 fuzzy sets and the TOPSIS method. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 44(12):1665–1673MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen SM, Hong JA (2014b) Multicriteria linguistic decision making based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and the aggregation of fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 286:63–74Google Scholar
  10. Chen SM, Wang NY, Pan JS (2009) Forecasting enrollments using automatic clustering techniques and fuzzy logical relationships. Expert Syst Appl 36(8):11070–11076Google Scholar
  11. Chen SM, Lin TE, Lee LW (2014) Group decision making using incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on the additive consistency and theorder consistency. Inf Sci 259:1–15zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Cui W, Blockley DI (1990) Interval probability theory for evidential support. Int J Intell Syst 5(2):183–192zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Diana LY, Adam SG, Daniel BH, Eric W (2012) Decision making under time pressure, modeled in a prospect theory framework. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 118(2):179–188Google Scholar
  14. Fan ZP, Liu Y, Shen RJ (2012) Risk decision analysis method for emergency response based on prospect theory. Syst Eng Theory Pract 32(5):977–984Google Scholar
  15. FEMA (2015) ICS Resource Center, Federal Emergency Management Agency “FEMA Glossary”. Retrievedfrom:
  16. He DY, Zhou RX (2010) Study on methods of decision-making under interval probability. J Syst Manag 19(2):210–214Google Scholar
  17. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Economentrica 47(2):263–291zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Langer T, Weber M (2001) Prospect theory, mental accounting, and differences in aggregated and segregated evaluation of lottery portfolios. Manage Sci 47(5):716–733Google Scholar
  19. Lee LW, Chen SM (2008) Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the extension of TOPSIS method and interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Kunming, China 12–15. pp 3260–3265Google Scholar
  20. Li T, Wang CF, Wang WB, Su WL (2005) A global optimization bionics algorithm for solving integer programming—plant growth simulation algorithm. Syst Eng Theory Pract 25(1):76–85Google Scholar
  21. Liu W, Li L (2015) An approach to determining the integrated weights of decision makers based on interval number group decision matrices. Knowl Based Syst 90(C):92–98Google Scholar
  22. Liu Y, Fan ZP, Zhang Y (2014) Risk decision analysis in emergency response: a method based on cumulative prospect theory. Comput Oper Res 42(2):75–82MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Lu SL, Yu SZ (2014) A fuzzy k-coverage approach for RFID network planning using plant growth simulation algorithm. Int J Adv Sci Technol 30(1):43–54Google Scholar
  24. Pedrycz W (2013) Granular computing-some insights and challenges. Mathw Soft Comput 20(2):15–18Google Scholar
  25. Pedrycz W, Chen SM (2011) Granular computing and intelligent systems: design with information granules of high order and high type. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  26. Pedrycz W, Chen SM (2015a) Granular computing and decision-making: interactive and iterative approaches. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  27. Pedrycz W, Chen SM (2015b) Information granularity, big data, and computational intelligence. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  28. Qiu JD, Li L (2017) A new approach for multiple attribute group decision making with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy information. Appl Soft Comput. Google Scholar
  29. Rajaram R, Kumar KS, Rajasekar N (2015) Power system reconfiguration in a radial distribution network for reducing losses and to improve voltage profile using modified plant growth simulation algorithm with distributed generation. Energy Rep 1(22):116–122Google Scholar
  30. Rao RS, Narasimham SVL, Ramalingaraju M (2011) Optimal capacitor placement in a radial distribution system using Plant Growth Simulation Algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 33(5):1133–1139Google Scholar
  31. Ren PJ, Xu ZS, Hao ZN (2017) Hesitant fuzzy thermodynamic method for emergency decision making based on prospect theory. IEEE Trans Cybern 47(9):2531–2543Google Scholar
  32. Sarma AK, Rafi KM (2011) Optimal selection of capacitors for radial distribution systems using plant growth simulation algorithm. Int J Adv Sci Technol 30:61–72Google Scholar
  33. Tsai PW, Pan JS, Chen SM, Liao BY, Hao SP (2008) Parallel cat swarm optimization. Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Kunming, China, vol 6, pp 3328–3333Google Scholar
  34. Tsai PW, Pan JS, Chen SM, Liao BY (2012) Enhanced parallel cat swarm optimization based on the Taguchi method. Expert Syst Appl 39(7):6309–6319Google Scholar
  35. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advance in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5(4):297–323zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang ZY, Li YJ (2015) Intervention mechanism of behavioral decision-making on emergency and its starting strategy of contingency plan. Syst Eng Theory Pract 35(7):2863–1870Google Scholar
  37. Wang L, Wang YM (2013) Study on the emergency decision method of dynamic reference point based on prospect theory. Chin J Manag Sci 1:132–140Google Scholar
  38. Wang L, Zhang ZX, Wang YM (2015) A prospect theory-based interval dynamic reference point for emergency decision making. Expert Syst Appl 42:9379–9388Google Scholar
  39. Wang L, Wang YM, Martínez L (2017) A group decision method based on prospect theory for emergency situations. Inf Sci 418–419:119–135Google Scholar
  40. Xu XH, Yang YS (2017) Method of dynamic emergency decision for risk type of large group based on cumulative prospect theory. Control Decision 32(11):19567–1965Google Scholar
  41. Xu YJ, Zhang WC, Wang HM (2015a) A conflict-eliminating approach for emergency group decision of unconventional incidents. Knowl Based Syst 83(1):92–104Google Scholar
  42. Xu XH, Du ZJ, Chen XH (2015b) Consensus model for multi-criteria large-group emergency decision making considering non-cooperative behaviors and minority opinions. Decis Support Syst 79:150–160Google Scholar
  43. Yu L, Lai KK (2011) A distance-based group decision-making methodology for multi-person multi-criteria emergency decision support. Decis Support Syst 51(2):307–315Google Scholar
  44. Zadeh L (1997) Towards a theory of fuzzy information granulation and its centrality in human reasoning and fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets Syst 90:111–117MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhou L, Xu ZS, Wu XH, Fujita H (2017) Emergency decision making for natural disasters: an overview. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of BusinessJiangnan UniversityWuxiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations