基于分段策略评分的冲突主体偏好排序方法及其应用

冲突中各利益主体的偏好信息对冲突局势的演变和纠纷调解具有重要影响。现有的冲突偏好排序方法主要基于决策者对冲突局势或状态、策略权重和声明信息的主观判断和理解,缺乏科学的数据来源支撑。为准确获取冲突主体的偏好信息,本文提出了一种基于调查法的分段策略冲突偏好排序方法。首先,根据决策者类别将冲突策略集合进行分段,并通过问卷、调研等方法获取每个冲突主体对所有分段策略的重要度评分信息。在此基础上,计算决策者对各个冲突状态的综合偏好评分,进而得到状态偏好的排序结果。最后以医患纠纷为例,对比分析了传统策略权重法和分段策略评分法的偏好排序和稳定性分析结果,进一步验证了所提方法的有效性。

A Preference Ranking Approach Based on Segmented Option Weighting and Its Application

The preference elicitation of stakeholders or decision makers in conflicts has a significant effect on the conflict evolution and mediation strategies. The existing preference ranking methods in the area of conflict analysis mainly depends on decision-makers’ subjective judgment and personal understanding of conflict states, option weights and preference statements, which lacks the support of reliable data. In order to obtain more accurate preference information of decision makers in disputes, a new preference ranking approach based on segmented option weighting and practical survey is proposed in this research within the framework of the graph model for conflict resolution. To begin with, the option set is segmented according to the type of decision makers and then the relative importance ranking or weights can be determined by using questionnaires or surveys. Based on the results, the total accumulated score for each conflict state can be calculated by using the segmented option weighing method and then the preference ranking of states for every decision maker can be obtained. Finally, the doctor-patient dispute is modeled and analyzed by using the graph model for conflict resolution methodology. Moreover, the preference ranking and stability analysis results of traditional and segmented option weighting methods are compared, which further verifies the effectiveness of the proposed preference ranking method in this research.