Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Teranga Go!: Carpooling Collaborative Consumption Community with multi-criteria hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set opinions to build confidence and trust

Published 7 Feb 2024 in cs.CY and cs.AI | (2403.05550v1)

Abstract: Classic Delphi and Fuzzy Delphi methods are used to test content validity of a data collection tools such as questionnaires. Fuzzy Delphi takes the opinion issued by judges from a linguistic perspective reducing ambiguity in opinions by using fuzzy numbers. We propose an extension named 2-Tuple Fuzzy Linguistic Delphi method to deal with scenarios in which judges show different expertise degrees by using fuzzy multigranular semantics of the linguistic terms and to obtain intermediate and final results expressed by 2-tuple linguistic values. The key idea of our proposal is to validate the full questionnaire by means of the evaluation of its parts, defining the validity of each item as a Decision Making problem. Taking the opinion of experts, we measure the degree of consensus, the degree of consistency, and the linguistic score of each item, in order to detect those items that affect, positively or negatively, the quality of the instrument. Considering the real need to evaluate a b-learning educational experience with a consensual questionnaire, we present a Decision Making model for questionnaire validation that solve it. Additionally, we contribute to this consensus reaching problem by developing an online tool under GPL v3 license. The software visualizes the collective valuations for each iteration and assists to determine which parts of the questionnaire should be modified to reach a consensual solution.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (53)
  1. Technology acceptance model in m-learning context: A systematic review. Computers & Education 125 (2018), 389–412.
  2. Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the community of inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and Higher Education 11, 3-4 (2008), 133–136.
  3. Bartlett, M. S. Tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 3, 2 (1950), 77–85.
  4. Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education, 2012.
  5. Berk, R. A. Importance of expert judgment in content-related validity evidence. Western journal of nursing research 12, 5 (1990), 659–671.
  6. A linguistic multi-criteria decision making model applied to the integration of education questionnaires. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 4, 5 (2011), 946–959.
  7. The fuzzy delphi method via fuzzy statistics and membership function fitting and an application to the human resources. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 112, 3 (2000), 511 – 520.
  8. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods. In Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making. Springer, 1992, pp. 289–486.
  9. Cronbach, L. J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 3 (1951), 297–334.
  10. Dalkey, N. An experimental study of group opinion: The delphi method. Futures 1, 5 (1969), 408–426.
  11. An experimental application of the delphi method to the use of experts. Management science 9, 3 (1963), 458–467.
  12. Assessing content validity and content equivalence using structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling 9, 2 (2002), 283–297.
  13. An extended hierarchical linguistic model for decision-making problems. Computational Intelligence 27, 3 (2011), 489–512.
  14. Assessing the quality of tests: Revision of the efpa review model. Psicothema 25, 3 (2013), 283–291.
  15. Cuestionarios para la evaluacion de la comunicacion y la satisfaccion al aplicar metodologias flipped classroom combinadas con m-learning en educacion superior. In III Congreso Internacional de Educación Mediática y Competencia Digital (2017), pp. 1145–1163.
  16. Toward the development of a metacognition construct for communities of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education 17, Supplement C (2013), 84 – 89.
  17. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2, 2 (1999), 87 – 105.
  18. Computing with words in decision making: Foundations, trends and prospects. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making 8, 4 (Dec. 2009), 337–364.
  19. A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Transactions on fuzzy systems 8, 6 (2000), 746–752.
  20. A model based on linguistic 2-tuples for dealing with multigranular hierarchical linguistic contexts in multi-expert decision-making. IEEE Transactions on fuzzy systems 31, 2 (2001), 227–234.
  21. Validating an instrument for clinical supervision using an expert panel. International Journal of nursing studies 40, 6 (2003), 619–625.
  22. The max-min delphi method and fuzzy delphi method via fuzzy integration. Fuzzy sets and systems 55, 3 (1993), 241–253.
  23. Editorial introduction: Collaborative learning enhanced by mobile technologies. British Journal of Educational Technology (2017), 201–206.
  24. Group decision making and consensus under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 49, 1 (1992), 21–31.
  25. Kaiser, H. F. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39, 1 (1974), 31–36.
  26. Kaiser, H. F. A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education. British Journal of Educational Technology 49, 3 (2018), 398–411.
  27. Kim, J. Developing an instrument to measure social presence in distance higher education. Br. J. of Educational Technol. 42, 5 (2011), 763 – 777.
  28. Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education 31, 1 (2000), 30–43.
  29. Lawshe, C. H. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology 28, 4 (1975), 563–575.
  30. A suggested change in terminology and emphasis regarding validity and education. Educational researcher 36, 8 (2007), 437–448.
  31. Lynn, M. R. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing research 35, 6 (1986), 382–385.
  32. An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making: Extensions, applications and challenges. Information Sciences 207 (2012), 1–18.
  33. What computing with words means to me [discussion forum]. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 5, 1 (2010), 20–26.
  34. A web tool to support decision making in the housing market using hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Applied Soft Computing 35 (2015), 949 – 957.
  35. Teranga go!: Carpooling collaborative consumption community with multi-criteria hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set opinions to build confidence and trust. Applied Soft Computing 67 (2018), 941 – 952.
  36. A group decision making support system for the web: How to work in environments with a high number of participants and alternatives. Applied Soft Computing 68 (2018), 191–201.
  37. A pilot study of fuzzy set modification of delphi. Human Systems Management 5, 1 (1985), 76–80.
  38. Noorderhaven, N. G. Strategic decision making. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley, 1995.
  39. Perceived usability evaluation of learning management systems: Empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 16, 2 (2015), 227–246.
  40. An overview of coefficient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal consistency coefficients with psychological research measures. Perceptual and Motor Skills 105, 3 (2007), 997–1014.
  41. Rubin, S. H. Computing with words. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 29, 4 (1999), 518–524.
  42. Rules for reaching consensus: a modern approach to decision making. Amsterdam: Pfeiffer, 1994.
  43. Expert judgment and risk perception. In The Eleventh International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (2001), International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers.
  44. The delphi method: Techniques and applications. Journal of Marketing Research 13 (1976), 317.
  45. Wan, S.-P. 2-tuple linguistic hybrid arithmetic aggregation operators and application to multi-attribute group decision making. Knowledge-Based Systems 45 (2013), 31–40.
  46. Some dependent aggregation operators with 2-tuple linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Expert Systems with Applications 39, 5 (2012), 5881–5886.
  47. Approaches based on 2-tuple linguistic power aggregation operators for multiple attribute group decision making under linguistic environment. Applied Soft Computing 11, 5 (2011), 3988–3997.
  48. Yager, R. R. On the retranslation process in zadeh’s paradigm of computing with words. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 34, 2 (April 2004), 1184–1195.
  49. Zadeh, L. A. Information and control. Fuzzy Sets 8, 3 (1965), 338–353.
  50. Zadeh, L. A. The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—i. Information Sciences 8, 3 (1975), 199–249.
  51. Zadeh, L. A. Fuzzy logic= computing with words. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 4, 2 (1996), 103–111.
  52. Zadeh, L. A. Computing with words: Principal concepts and ideas, vol. 277. Springer, 2012.
  53. Zhang, Y. A. Characteristics of Mobile Teaching and Learning. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2015.
Citations (19)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 0 likes about this paper.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up for Free