A Note on a Group Preference Axiomatization with Cardinal Utility

References

• Arrow K. Social Choice and Individual Values (1951) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Baucells M, Sarin R. Group decisions with multiple criteria. Management Sci. (2003) 49(8):1105–1118Link, Google Scholar
• Bose U, Davey AM, Olson DL. Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS. Omega (1997) 25(6):691–706Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhillon A, Mertens J-F. Relative utilitarianism. Econometrica (1999) 67(3):471–498Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer J, Sarin R. Group preference aggregation rules based on strength of preference. Management Sci. (1979) 25(9):822–832Link, Google Scholar
• Gibbard A. Manipulation of voting schemes: A general result. Econometrica (1973) 41(4):587–601Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harsanyi J. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. J. Political Econom. (1955) 63(4):309–321Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvey C. Aggregation of individuals' preference intensities into social preference intensity. Soc. Choice Welfare (1999) 16(1):65–79Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keefer DL, Kirkwood CW, Corner JL. Perspective on decision analysis applications, 1990–2001. Decision Anal. (2004) 1(1):4–22Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL. A group preference axiomatization with cardinal utility. Management Sci. (1976) 23(2):140–145Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL, Kirkwood CW. Group decision making using cardinal social welfare functions. Management Sci. (1975) 22(4):430–437Link, Google Scholar
• Kilgour DM, Eden C. Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation (2010) (Springer, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merrick JRW, Parnell GS, Barnett J, Garcia M. A multiple-objective decision analysis of stakeholder values to identify watershed improvement needs. Decision Anal. (2005) 2(1):44–57Link, Google Scholar
• Phillips LD, Bana e Costa C. Transparent prioritisation, budgeting, and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing. Ann. Oper. Res. (2007) 154(1):51–68Crossref, Google Scholar
• Satterthwaite M. Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. J. Political Econom. (1975) 10(2):187–217Google Scholar
• Schein ES. Process Consultation Revisited (1999) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour (1947) 2nd ed.(Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Google Scholar