Special Issue "Axioms of Decision Support System"

Quicklinks

A special issue of Axioms (ISSN 2075-1680).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 November 2013)

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Faith-Michael E Uzoka (Website)

Department of Computer Science & Information Systems, Mount Royal University, 4825 Mount Royal Gate SW, Calgary, Alberta T3E 6K6, Canada T3E 6K6
Interests: evaluation systems; organizational computing and impacts; medical Informatics; and technology adoption and innovation

Special Issue Information

Submission

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. Papers will be published continuously (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Axioms is an international peer-reviewed Open Access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 300 CHF (Swiss Francs). English correction and/or formatting fees of 250 CHF (Swiss Francs) will be charged in certain cases for those articles accepted for publication that require extensive additional formatting and/or English corrections.

Keywords

  • decision support systems
  • executive information systems
  • expert systems for decision making
  • knowledge based systems
  • unsolved problems and future trends in decision support
  • concepts and operational basis for decision support systems
  • integration, platform, and implementation issues
  • decision support theories and techniques
  • evaluation and organizational impact of decision support systems

Published Papers (6 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-6
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

Open AccessArticle Increasing Personal Value Congruence in Computerized Decision Support Using System Feedback
Axioms 2014, 3(1), 84-108; doi:10.3390/axioms3010084
Received: 15 October 2013 / Revised: 16 January 2014 / Accepted: 13 February 2014 / Published: 25 February 2014
PDF Full-text (315 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The Theory of Universals in Values (TUV), a reliable and validated conceptualization of personal values used in psychology, is used to examine the effect of system feedback delivered by a Decision Support System (DSS) on personal values. The results indicate that value-based [...] Read more.
The Theory of Universals in Values (TUV), a reliable and validated conceptualization of personal values used in psychology, is used to examine the effect of system feedback delivered by a Decision Support System (DSS) on personal values. The results indicate that value-based decision-making behavior can be influenced by DSS feedback to address value congruence in decision-making. User behavior was shown to follow the outcomes expected by operant theory when feedback was supportive and to follow the outcomes of reactance theory when feedback was challenging. This result suggests that practitioners and Information System (IS) researchers should consider user values when designing computerized decision feedback to adjust a system’s design such that the potential user backlash is avoided or congruence between organizational and personal values is achieved. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Axioms of Decision Support System)
Open AccessArticle A Hybrid Artificial Reputation Model Involving Interaction Trust, Witness Information and the Trust Model to Calculate the Trust Value of Service Providers
Axioms 2014, 3(1), 50-63; doi:10.3390/axioms3010050
Received: 12 November 2013 / Revised: 20 January 2014 / Accepted: 27 January 2014 / Published: 19 February 2014
PDF Full-text (330 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Agent interaction in a community, such as the online buyer-seller scenario, is often uncertain, as when an agent comes in contact with other agents they initially know nothing about each other. Currently, many reputation models are developed that help service consumers select [...] Read more.
Agent interaction in a community, such as the online buyer-seller scenario, is often uncertain, as when an agent comes in contact with other agents they initially know nothing about each other. Currently, many reputation models are developed that help service consumers select better service providers. Reputation models also help agents to make a decision on who they should trust and transact with in the future. These reputation models are either built on interaction trust that involves direct experience as a source of information or they are built upon witness information also known as word-of-mouth that involves the reports provided by others. Neither the interaction trust nor the witness information models alone succeed in such uncertain interactions. In this paper we propose a hybrid reputation model involving both interaction trust and witness information to address the shortcomings of existing reputation models when taken separately. A sample simulation is built to setup buyer-seller services and uncertain interactions. Experiments reveal that the hybrid approach leads to better selection of trustworthy agents where consumers select more reputable service providers, eventually helping consumers obtain more gains. Furthermore, the trust model developed is used in calculating trust values of service providers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Axioms of Decision Support System)
Open AccessArticle Second-Order Risk Constraints in Decision Analysis
Axioms 2014, 3(1), 31-45; doi:10.3390/axioms3010031
Received: 8 November 2013 / Revised: 24 December 2013 / Accepted: 27 December 2013 / Published: 17 January 2014
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (301 KB)
Abstract
Recently, representations and methods aimed at analysing decision problems where probabilities and values (utilities) are associated with distributions over them (second-order representations) have been suggested. In this paper we present an approach to how imprecise information can be modelled by means of [...] Read more.
Recently, representations and methods aimed at analysing decision problems where probabilities and values (utilities) are associated with distributions over them (second-order representations) have been suggested. In this paper we present an approach to how imprecise information can be modelled by means of second-order distributions and how a risk evaluation process can be elaborated by integrating procedures for numerically imprecise probabilities and utilities. We discuss some shortcomings of the use of the principle of maximising the expected utility and of utility theory in general, and offer remedies by the introduction of supplementary decision rules based on a concept of risk constraints taking advantage of second-order distributions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Axioms of Decision Support System)
Open AccessCommunication A Method for Negotiating Various Customer Requirements for Public Service Design
Axioms 2014, 3(1), 1-9; doi:10.3390/axioms3010001
Received: 4 November 2013 / Revised: 16 December 2013 / Accepted: 17 December 2013 / Published: 20 December 2013
PDF Full-text (247 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
A method for public service design, which enables designers to realize high-value added service design by considering plural different customer groups in parallel, is proposed. In General, service designs focus on specific customers. However, because of the diversity of customer requirements, it [...] Read more.
A method for public service design, which enables designers to realize high-value added service design by considering plural different customer groups in parallel, is proposed. In General, service designs focus on specific customers. However, because of the diversity of customer requirements, it is difficult to design a public service that addresses the requirements of all customers. To achieve higher customer satisfaction, it is imperative to summarize the requirements of various customers and design a service by considering customers belonging to different categories. In this article, we propose a method that enables highly public service development by considering groups of various customers and minimizing customer dissatisfaction by adopting a group-decision-making approach. As a consequence, improvement of effectiveness of highly public service development can be expected. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Axioms of Decision Support System)

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

Open AccessReview Business Decision-Making Using Geospatial Data: A Research Framework and Literature Review
Axioms 2014, 3(1), 10-30; doi:10.3390/axioms3010010
Received: 19 October 2013 / Revised: 26 November 2013 / Accepted: 17 December 2013 / Published: 23 December 2013
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (218 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Organizations that leverage their increasing volume of geospatial data have the potential to enhance their strategic and organizational decisions. However, literature describing the best techniques to make decisions using geospatial data and the best approaches to take advantage of geospatial data’s unique [...] Read more.
Organizations that leverage their increasing volume of geospatial data have the potential to enhance their strategic and organizational decisions. However, literature describing the best techniques to make decisions using geospatial data and the best approaches to take advantage of geospatial data’s unique visualization capabilities is limited. This paper reviews the use of geospatial visualization and its effects on decision performance, which is one of the many components of decision-making when using geospatial data. Additionally, this paper proposes a comprehensive model allowing researchers to better understand decision-making using geospatial data and provides a robust foundation for future research. Finally, this paper makes an argument for further research of information-presentation, task-characteristics, user-characteristics and their effects on decision-performance when utilizing geospatial data. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Axioms of Decision Support System)

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

Open AccessConcept Paper The Three Laws of Thought, Plus One: The Law of Comparisons
Axioms 2014, 3(1), 46-49; doi:10.3390/axioms3010046
Received: 30 December 2013 / Revised: 21 January 2014 / Accepted: 21 January 2014 / Published: 10 February 2014
PDF Full-text (133 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The rules of logic are nearly 2500 years old and date back to Plato and Aristotle who set down the three laws of thought: identity, non-contradiction, and excluded middle. The use of language and logic has been adequate for us to develop [...] Read more.
The rules of logic are nearly 2500 years old and date back to Plato and Aristotle who set down the three laws of thought: identity, non-contradiction, and excluded middle. The use of language and logic has been adequate for us to develop mathematics, prove theorems, and create scientific knowledge. However, the laws of thought are incomplete. We need to extend our logical system by adding to the very old laws of thought an essential yet poorly understood law. It is a necessary law of thought that resides in our biology even deeper than the other three laws. It is related to the rudiments of how we as living beings, and even nonliving things, respond to influences as stimuli. It helps us discriminate between being ourselves and sensing that there is something else that is not ourselves that even amoebas seem to know. It is the intrinsic ability to sense and distinguish. This fourth law is the law of comparisons. Although it has been missing from our logical deductions it underlies the other three laws of thought because without it we cannot know what is and what is not. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Axioms of Decision Support System)

Journal Contact

MDPI AG
Axioms Editorial Office
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
axioms@mdpi.com
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
Editorial Board
Contact Details Submit to Axioms
Back to Top