demonstration

Public Access

ConsesnsUs: Visualizing Points of Disagreement for Multi-Criteria Collaborative Decision Making

Authors:

Steven P. DowAuthors Info & Claims

CSCW '17 Companion: Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

Pages 17 - 20

https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3023269

Published: 25 February 2017 Publication History

PDF eReader

Abstract

Groups often face difficulty reaching consensus. For complex decisions with multiple latent criteria, discourse alone may impede groups from pinpointing fundamental disagreements. To help support a consensus building process, we introduce ConsensUs, a novel visualization tool that highlights disagreements in comparative decisions. The tool fa cilitates groups to specify comparison criteria and to quantify their subjective opinions across these criteria. ConsensUs then highlights salient differences between members. An evaluation with 87 participants shows that ConsensUs helps individuals identify points of disagreement within groups and leads people to align their scores more with the group opinion. We discuss the larger design space for supporting the group consensus process, and our future directions to extend this approach to large-scale decision making platforms.

References

[1]

Robert O Briggs, Gwendolyn L Kolfschoten, and Gert-Jan de Vreede. 2005. Toward a theoretical model of consensus building. AMCIS 2005 Proceedings (2005), 12.

Google Scholar

[2]

Tomas Gal, Theodor Stewart, and Thomas Hanne. 2013. Multicriteria decision making: advances in MCDM models, algorithms, theory, and applications. Vol. 21. Springer Science & Business Media.

Google Scholar

[3]

Hiroko Itakura. 2001. Describing conversational dominance. Journal of Pragmatics 33, 12 (2001), 1859--1880.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[4]

Sara Kiesler and Lee Sproull. 1992. Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational behavior and human decision processes 52, 1 (1992), 96--123.

Google Scholar

[5]

Simon SK Lam and John Schaubroeck. 2000. Improving group decisions by better pooling information: a comparative advantage of group decision support systems. Journal of Applied Psychology 85, 4 (2000), 565.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[6]

Helmut Lamm and Gisela Trommsdorff. 1973. Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): A review. European journal of social psychology 3, 4 (1973), 361--388.

Google Scholar

[7]

Bibb Latane, Kipling Williams, and Stephen Harkins. 1979. Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of personality and social psychology 37, 6 (1979), 822.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[8]

Martin Stettinger, Alexander Felfernig, Gerhard Leitner, and Stefan Reiterer. 2015. Counteracting Anchoring Effects in Group Decision Making. In International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization. Springer, 118--130.

Google Scholar

[9]

Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. 1975. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In Utility, probability, and human decision making. Springer, 141-162.

Google Scholar

[10]

Roshanak Zilouchian Moghaddam, Zane Nicholson, and Brian P Bailey. 2015. Procid: Bridging Consensus Building Theory with the Practice of Distributed Design Discussions. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. ACM, 686--699.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Sistrunk ASelf NBiswas SLuther KVerdezoto NRamakrishnan N(2024)Redistrict: Online Public Deliberation Support that Connects and Rebuilds Inclusive CommunitiesProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373938:CSCW1(1-23)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637393
Raffaillac TBoukhelifa NCrouzat EStark FMüller JLasseur J(2024)Supporting Interdisciplinary Research with Cards-based Workshops - A Case Study on Participatory Planning for Mountain PastoralismExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3637107(1-8)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637107
Oral EChawla RWijkstra MMahyar NDimara E(2024)From Information to Choice: A Critical Inquiry Into Visualization Tools for Decision MakingIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics10.1109/TVCG.2023.332659330:1(359-369)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TVCG.2023.3326593
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

ConsesnsUs: Visualizing Points of Disagreement for Multi-Criteria Collaborative Decision Making

Recommendations

ConsensUs: Supporting Multi-Criteria Group Decisions by Visualizing Points of Disagreement

Groups often face difficulty reaching consensus. For complex decisions with multiple criteria, verbal and written discourse alone may impede groups from pinpointing and moving past fundamental disagreements. To help support consensus building, we ...
Consensus-based decision support for multicriteria group decision making

Consensus decision making is complex and challenging in multicriteria group decision making due to the involvement of several decision makers, the presence of multiple, and often conflicting criteria, and the existence of subjectiveness and imprecision ...
Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach

This paper examines consensus building in AHP-group decision making from a Bayesian perspective. In accordance with the multicriteria procedural rationality paradigm, the methodology employed in this study permits the automatic identification, in a ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

CSCW '17 Companion: Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

February 2017

472 pages

ISBN:9781450346887

DOI:10.1145/3022198

General Chairs:
Charlotte P. Lee
University of Washington
,
Steve Poltrock
Retired
,
Program Chairs:
Louise Barkhuus
Stockholm University and Cornell Tech
,
Marcos Borges
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
,
Wendy Kellogg
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 25 February 2017

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Demonstration

Funding Sources

Conference

CSCW '17

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CSCW '17: Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

February 25 - March 1, 2017

Oregon, Portland, USA

Acceptance Rates

CSCW '17 Companion Paper Acceptance Rate 183 of 530 submissions, 35%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CSCW '25

Sponsor:
sigchi

Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 18 - 22, 2025

Bergen , Norway

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

10
Total Citations
View Citations
492
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)76
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11

Reflects downloads up to 21 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Sistrunk ASelf NBiswas SLuther KVerdezoto NRamakrishnan N(2024)Redistrict: Online Public Deliberation Support that Connects and Rebuilds Inclusive CommunitiesProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373938:CSCW1(1-23)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637393
Raffaillac TBoukhelifa NCrouzat EStark FMüller JLasseur J(2024)Supporting Interdisciplinary Research with Cards-based Workshops - A Case Study on Participatory Planning for Mountain PastoralismExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3637107(1-8)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637107
Oral EChawla RWijkstra MMahyar NDimara E(2024)From Information to Choice: A Critical Inquiry Into Visualization Tools for Decision MakingIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics10.1109/TVCG.2023.332659330:1(359-369)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TVCG.2023.3326593
Tran TFelfernig ALe V(2023)An overview of consensus models for group decision-making and group recommender systemsUser Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction10.1007/s11257-023-09380-z34:3(489-547)Online publication date: 22-Sep-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-023-09380-z
Hindalong EJohnson JCarenini GMunzner T(2022)Abstractions for Visualizing Preferences in Group DecisionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35128966:CSCW1(1-44)Online publication date: 7-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3512896
Shrestha HCachel KAlkhathlan MRundensteiner EHarrison L(2022)FairFuse: Interactive Visual Support for Fair Consensus Ranking2022 IEEE Visualization and Visual Analytics (VIS)10.1109/VIS54862.2022.00022(65-69)Online publication date: Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/VIS54862.2022.00022
Arnould MEnjolras MCamargo M(2022)Designing a group decision-making tool under Living Lab project mode: The case of ConsensUs2022 IEEE 28th International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC) & 31st International Association For Management of Technology (IAMOT) Joint Conference10.1109/ICE/ITMC-IAMOT55089.2022.10033130(1-10)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICE/ITMC-IAMOT55089.2022.10033130
Jameson AWillemsen MFelfernig A(2022)Individual and Group Decision Making and Recommender SystemsRecommender Systems Handbook10.1007/978-1-0716-2197-4_21(789-832)Online publication date: 22-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-2197-4_21
Metoyer RChuanromanee TGirgis GZhi QKinyon E(2020)Supporting Storytelling With Evidence in Holistic Review Processes: A Participatory Design ApproachProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/33928704:CSCW1(1-24)Online publication date: 29-May-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3392870
Hindalong EJohnson JCarenini GMunzner T(2020)Towards Rigorously Designed Preference Visualizations for Group Decision Making2020 IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis)10.1109/PacificVis48177.2020.5111(181-190)Online publication date: Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/PacificVis48177.2020.5111

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

ConsensUs: Supporting Multi-Criteria Group Decisions by Visualizing Points of Disagreement

Consensus-based decision support for multicriteria group decision making

Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach