The aim of this paper is to construct a matrix of interpersonal influences employing TOPSIS and then to apply the matrix in influence model and doubly extended TOPSIS. Entries of that matrix are obtained from coefficients of relative closeness. Such a systematically constructed matrix performs better than the direct influence matrix because of the consideration of alternatives under certain criteria/attributes. Implementation of such influence matrix improves an influence model and group decision process. In this paper, TOPSIS is used for individual as well as group decisions. Once the decisions are reached by individuals with the help of TOPSIS, then coefficients of relative closeness are obtained and matrix of interpersonal influences is constructed. This matrix is used in influence model and to construct the influenced decision matrices. These influenced decision matrices are aggregated to get the collective decision. This strategy is based on the fact that the decisions taken by individuals affect their collective decision in future.
AruldossM., LakshmiT.M. and VenkatesanV.P., A survey on multicriteria decision making methods and its applications, American Journal of Information Systems1(1) (2013), 31–43.
2.
JoshiD. and KumarS., Intuitionistic fuzzy entropy and distance measure based TOPSIS method for multi-criteria decision making, Egyptian Informatics Journal15 (2014), 97–104.
3.
EraslanS. and CagmanN., A decision making method by combining TOPSIS and grey relation method under fuzzy soft sets, Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences8(1) (2017), 53–64.
4.
EraslanS. and KaraaslanF., A group decision making method based on TOPSIS under fuzzy soft environment, Journal of New Theory3 (2015), 30–40.
5.
WangL., WangQ., XuS. and NiM., Distance and similarity measures of dual hesitant fuzzy sets with their applications to multiple attribute decision making, IEEE International Conference on Progress in Informatics and Computing, (2014).
6.
PengX. and YangY., Interval-valued hesitant fuzzy soft sets and their application in Decision Making, Fundamenta Informaticae141 (2015), 71–93.
7.
BreigerR., CarleyK. and PattisonP., Dynamic social network modeling and analysis: workshop summary and papers, The National Academies Press Washington, (2003).
8.
KhalidA. and BegI., Inuence model of evasive decision makers, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems37(2) (2019), 2539–2548.
9.
FriedkinN. and JohnsonE., Social inuence networks and opinion change, Advances in Group Processes16(1) (1999), 1–29.
10.
DegrootM.H., Reaching a consensus, Journal of the American Statistical Association69(345) (1974), 118–121.
11.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8 (1965), 338–353.
12.
ChuJ., LiuX. and WangY., Social network analysis based approach to group decision making problem with fuzzy preference relations, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems31 (2016), 1271–1285.
13.
MengF. and ChenX., A new method for group decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations, Knowledge Based Systems73 (2015), 111–123.
14.
Tapia GarćaJ.M., del MoralM.J., MartinezM.A. and Herrera-ViedmaE., A consensus model for group decision making problems with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations, Expert Systems with Applications39 (2012), 10022–10030.
15.
YanH.B. and MaT.J., A group decision-making approach to uncertain quality function deployment based on fuzzy preference relation and fuzzy majority, European Journal of Operational Research241 (2015), 815–829.
16.
ZhuB. and XuZ., A fuzzy linear programming method for group decision making with additive reciprocal fuzzy preference relations, Fuzzy Sets and Systems246 (2014), 19–33.
17.
EraslanS. and CagmanN., A decision making method by combining TOPSIS and grey relation method under fuzzy soft sets, Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences8(1) (2017), 53–64.
18.
ZadehL.A., A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages, Computers and Mathematics with Applications9(1) (1983), 149–184.
19.
YagerR.R., Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operators, International Journal of Intelligent Systems11(1) (1996), 49–73.
20.
YagerR.R., Quantifiers in the formulation of multiple objective decision function, Information Sciences31(2) (1983), 107–139.
21.
CapuanoN., ChiclanaF., FujitaH., Herrera-VeidmaE. and LoiaV., Fuzzy group decision making with incomplete information guided by social innuence, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems (2017), DOI 10.1109/TFUZZ.2017.2744605
22.
HwangC.L. and YoonK., Multuple attribute decision making, Methods and Applications (1981), New York, Springer-Verlag.
23.
KacprzakD., A doubly extende TOPSIS method for group decision making based on ordered fuzzy numbers, Expert Systems with Applications116 (2019), 243–254.
24.
FriedkinN.E., A formal theory of social power, Journal of Mathematical Psychology12(2) (1986), 103–126.
25.
LuY., QuS., XuZ., MaG. and LiZ., Multiattribute social network matching with unknown weight and different risk preference, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems DOI: 10.3233/JIFS-182535
26.
ChenZ.S., YangY., WangX.J., ChinK.S. and TsuiK.L., Fostering linguistic decision making under uncertainty: A proportional interval type-2 hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on Hamacher aggregation operators and andness optimization problems, Information Sciences500 (2019), 229–258.
27.
ChenZ.S., LiM., KongW.T. and ChinK.S., Evaluation and selection of HazMat transportation alternatives: A PHFLTS and TOPSIS integrated multi-perspective approach, Environmental Research and Public Health16(21) (2019).
