Decision support methods, information processing devices, and computer programs

Abstract

This technology provides a way to mitigate the sense of unfairness that may arise among members of a multi-user decision-making process. [Solution] The information processing device 16 comprises an acquisition unit 40, an entry reception unit 42, and a priority determination unit 44. The acquisition unit 40 acquires information regarding matters for which decisions should be made. The entry reception unit 42 accepts user entries for decisions regarding the above matters. The priority determination unit 44 determines the priority of decisions regarding the above matters for each of the one or more users who have entered to make decisions regarding the above matters. The entry reception unit 42 accepts user entries for decisions regarding each matter for which decisions should be made.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present disclosure relates to data processing technologies, and particularly to a decision-making support method, an information processing apparatus, and a computer program.

Background Art

[0002] There are situations where decisions should be made in community units composed of multiple people, such as families, workplaces, and local communities. In Patent Document 1 below, when carrying out a project in a community, an apparatus is described that estimates action items and issues necessary for decision-making in the community using a model that outputs action items and issues necessary for carrying out the project, and outputs the estimation results.

Prior Art Documents

Patent Documents

[0003]

Patent Document 1

Summary of the Invention

Problems to be Solved by the Invention

[0004] When making decisions in community units composed of multiple people, such as families, workplaces, and local communities, members belonging to the community want to voice their opinions regarding the decision-making. However, when their opinions are adopted, they may feel guilty due to considerations for other community members, or when taking the perspective of members whose opinions were not adopted, they may feel a sense of unfairness. One object of the present disclosure is to provide a technique that ensures fairness and suppresses the sense of unfairness that may arise in each member in decision-making by multiple users.

Means for Solving the Problems

[0005] To solve the above problems, a decision support method in one aspect of the present disclosure involves a computer that acquires information on matters to be decided, accepts user entries for decision-making on the matters, determines the priority of decision-making for each of the one or more users who have entered for decision-making on the matters, and accepts user entries for decision-making for each matter to be decided.

[0006] Another aspect of this disclosure is an information processing device. This device includes an acquisition unit that acquires information on matters for which a decision should be made, an entry acceptance unit that accepts user entries for decision-making on matters, and a priority determination unit that determines the priority of decision-making on matters for each of the one or more users who have entered for decision-making on matters. The entry acceptance unit accepts user entries for decision-making for each matter for which a decision should be made.

[0007] Furthermore, any combination of the above components, or any conversion of the expressions of this disclosure between systems, computer programs, recording media containing computer programs, etc., are also valid forms of this disclosure. [Effects of the Invention]

[0008] The technology disclosed herein can ensure fairness in decision-making among multiple users and suppress any potential feelings of unfairness that may arise among the members. [Brief explanation of the drawing]

[0009] [Figure 1] This is a diagram showing the configuration of the decision support system according to the first embodiment. [Figure 2] This is a block diagram showing the functional blocks of the information processing device according to the first embodiment. [Figure 3] This is a flowchart showing the operation of the information processing device according to the first embodiment. [Figure 4] This diagram shows an example of priority determination. [Figure 5]This is a block diagram showing the functional blocks of the information processing device according to the second embodiment. [Figure 6] This diagram shows an example of priority transfer. [Modes for carrying out the invention]

[0010] The subject of the apparatus or method in this disclosure comprises a computer. The functions of the subject of the apparatus or method in this disclosure are realized by the computer executing a program. The computer comprises a processor as its main hardware component, which operates according to the program. The processor is of any type as long as it can realize its functions by executing the program. The processor consists of one or more electronic circuits, including a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) or a large-scale integration (LSI). Multiple electronic circuits may be integrated on one chip or provided on multiple chips. Multiple chips may be aggregated in one device or provided on multiple devices. The program may be recorded on a non-temporary recording medium such as a computer-readable ROM (Read Only Memory), optical disc, or hard disk drive, or on a computer-readable temporary storage medium such as RAM (Random Access Memory). The program may be pre-stored on the recording medium or supplied to the recording medium or storage medium via a wide-area communication network, including the Internet.

[0011] In each embodiment of the system, when multiple users make decisions on various matters requiring decision-making (hereinafter also referred to as "tasks"), participants involved in the decision-making process are recruited for each task, and the priority of each user in the decision-making process is determined from among the group of users who have registered as participants (hereinafter also referred to as the "user group"). The user who is given the highest priority among the registered user group then gains the authority to make decisions on the task.

[0012] According to the system of each embodiment, in decision-making involving multiple users, entries from users participating in the decision-making process are accepted for each task. Furthermore, from this group of accepted users, the priority of each user is determined based on predetermined rules, regardless of the user's attributes, intentions, or power dynamics among users in the community. This makes it less likely for each user to feel a sense of unfairness towards other users participating in the decision-making process, and as a result, it helps maintain a sense of fairness when multiple users make decisions. In addition, in decision-making involving multiple users, the user who gains decision-making authority is less likely to feel guilty about gaining decision-making authority because the decision-making is based on automated processing rather than on their own will. In this disclosure, the user who is given the highest priority for the decision-making process of a task, or in other words, the user who is given decision-making authority for a task, is also referred to as the decision-maker.

[0013] A task refers to an issue that requires decision-making by multiple users. Examples of tasks include "deciding where to eat with family" or "deciding which movie to watch with community members." These multiple users may be members of the same organization or members of different organizations. For example, they could be family members, colleagues, or residents of the same area. The user group can be considered the population from which decision-makers for a task are selected.

[0014] <First Embodiment> Figure 1 shows the configuration of the decision support system 10 of the first embodiment. The decision support system 10 is an information processing system that supports decision-making by multiple users and comprises multiple user terminals 12, a shared terminal 14, and an information processing device 16. Each device in Figure 1 is connected to each other via a communication network 18 including a LAN, WAN, or the Internet.

[0015] Multiple user terminals 12 are information terminals operated by multiple different users, and include user terminal 12a, user terminal 12b, ... Each user terminal 12 transmits and receives user information, such as event information obtained through a dedicated application within the user terminal, decision-making entries from users, or task information for making decisions, to and from the information processing device 16 via the communication network 18. User terminals 12 may be PCs, tablet terminals, or smartphones. Shared terminal 14 is an information terminal used jointly by multiple users. Shared terminal 14 may be a PC, tablet terminal, home appliance, or housing equipment. Shared terminal 14 may also be a residential IoT infrastructure device that controls home appliances or housing equipment. Note that user terminals 12 and shared terminal 14 include a display unit such as an LCD display.

[0016] The information processing device 16 performs information processing to support task decision-making. The information processing device 16 may be a PC installed in the user's home or workplace, or it may be a server installed in the cloud.

[0017] Figure 2 is a block diagram showing the functional blocks of the information processing device 16 according to the first embodiment. Various functions shown in Figure 2 are realized by the computer mounted on the information processing device 16 executing a program. The computer includes hardware such as memory for loading programs, one or more processors (CPUs, etc.) for executing the loaded programs, auxiliary storage devices, and other LSIs. The processor is composed of multiple electronic circuits, including semiconductor integrated circuits and LSIs, and these multiple electronic circuits may be mounted on a single chip or on multiple chips. The functional blocks shown in Figure 2 are realized through the cooperation of hardware and software, and therefore, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that these functional blocks can be realized in various ways using hardware alone, software alone, or a combination thereof.

[0018] The information processing apparatus 16 includes a processing unit 20, a storage unit 22, and a communication unit 24. The processing unit 20 executes various information processing. The storage unit 22 stores various data that is referenced or updated by the processing unit 20. The communication unit 24 communicates with an external device according to a predetermined communication protocol. The processing unit 20 transmits and receives data to and from the user terminal 12 and the shared terminal 14 via the communication unit 24.

[0019] The storage unit 22 includes a user information storage unit 30 and a task information storage unit 32. The user information storage unit 30 stores information about a plurality of users (hereinafter also referred to as "user information") who can enter into a task decision. For example, when a plurality of users includes four people, namely, a father, a mother, a son, and a daughter who form a family, the user information may include information about each of the father, the mother, the son, and the daughter. The user information of the first embodiment includes the schedule of events (e.g., birthdays) for each of the plurality of users.

[0020] The task information storage unit 32 stores information about tasks (hereinafter also referred to as "task information") for which a decision should be made. The task information of the first embodiment includes an entry number, task details, information about the user (i.e., the registrant) who registered the task, the user's entry deadline, information about the user who entered (i.e., the entrant), and the priority of each determined user (each entrant).

[0021] The processing unit 20 includes an acquisition unit 40, an entry reception unit 42, a priority determination unit 44, and a notification unit 46. The functions of these plurality of functional blocks may be implemented in a computer program, and this computer program may be installed in the storage of the information processing apparatus 16. The processor mounted on the information processing apparatus 16 may read this computer program into the main memory and execute it to exhibit the functions of these plurality of functional blocks.

[0022] The acquisition unit 40 acquires information about tasks for which decisions should be made. The entry reception unit 42 accepts user entries for task decisions. The entry reception unit 42 accepts user entries for decisions for each task for which decisions should be made. For example, the entry reception unit 42 accepts user entries independently for the first task, "decide where to go out to eat with family," and the second task, "decide which movie to watch."

[0023] The priority determination unit 44 determines the priority of the task decision for each of the one or more users who have entered the task decision-making process. In other words, the priority determination unit 44 determines the priority for each of the one or more users who make up the group of users who have entered the task decision-making process.

[0024] The notification unit 46 notifies at least one of the user terminals 12 and shared terminals 14 of the priority information determined by the priority determination unit 44.

[0025] Figure 3 is a flowchart illustrating the operation of the information processing device 16 in the first embodiment. The operation of the decision support system 10 in the first embodiment will be described below with reference to Figure 3.

[0026] The user information storage unit 30 of the information processing device 16 stores user information for multiple users that have been registered in advance. These multiple users include a father, mother, son, and daughter who make up a family of four. Furthermore, the user information includes birthdays as dates of events related to each user.

[0027] Each of the user terminals 12 transmits task information entered by the user (registered user) to the information processing device 16. The acquisition unit 40 of the information processing device 16 receives the task information transmitted from the user terminals 12 (Y in S10) and stores the received task information in the task information storage unit 32 (S11). As previously described, the task information includes information that defines the deadline for entering into the task decision.

[0028] The entry receiving unit 42 of the information processing device 16 accepts user entries for decision-making regarding the task indicated by the new task information from the time the new task information is registered until the entry deadline (S12).

[0029] For example, the entry reception unit 42 is an entry screen that includes content prompting users to enter into a decision-making process for a newly registered task. This entry screen, which includes entry buttons and the like, may be sent to and displayed on multiple user terminals 12. Each of the multiple user terminals 12 may, in response to an operation by a user instructing them to enter, send entry information, including task identification information and user identification information (such as name), to the information processing device 16.

[0030] When the entry reception unit 42 receives user entry information for a decision on a certain task, it adds the user information (i.e., the entrant) indicated by the user's entry information to the information of the entry destination task (the aforementioned task) stored in the task information storage unit 32.

[0031] When the entry deadline for a task is reached, the task information storage unit 32 stores information about the group of users (one or more users) who entered the decision-making process for that task (S13). The priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 determines the priority of each user belonging to the group of users who entered the decision-making process for the task (S14). As explained in relation to Figure 4, the priority determination unit 44 may determine the priority of each user on a rule basis.

[0032] Figure 4 shows an example of priority determination. In this example, the multiple users are a family of four: father, mother, son, and daughter. The task is "Decide on a restaurant to go to as a family," the entry deadline is August 31st, and the task was registered by the mother. The entrants are the father, mother, and son; the daughter did not enter.

[0033] In the example shown in Figure 4, the priority determination unit 44 obtains the entry deadline (August 31st) for task decision-making from the task information storage unit 32. The priority determination unit 44 obtains the event dates (e.g., birthdays) of each registered user from the user information storage unit 30. The priority determination unit 44 assigns a higher priority to users whose difference between the entry deadline and the event date is smaller.

[0034] In the example in Figure 4, the difference between the entry deadline and the event date is 5 days for the father, 30 days for the mother, and 31 days for the son. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 sets the highest priority (priority 1) to the father, the second highest priority (priority 2) to the mother, and the lowest priority (priority 3) to the son. The priorities shown in Figure 4 can also be called priority levels. In the example in Figure 4, the priority determination unit 44 selects the father, who has been assigned the highest priority, as the decision-maker for the task. By determining each user's priority based on the difference between the entry deadline and the event date for each user in this way, it becomes easier to gain acceptance of the priority assigned to each user.

[0035] The notification unit 46 of the information processing device 16 outputs information regarding the priority determined in S14 (S15). The priority information may include at least information indicating the user to whom the highest priority has been assigned, i.e., the user selected as the decision-maker. The priority information may also include information indicating the priority of each user, and may also include information indicating the reason for determining the priority (for example, the difference between the entry deadline and each user's event schedule). The notification unit 46 may transmit the priority information to either or both of the user terminal 12 and the shared terminal 14. For example, the notification unit 46 may transmit detailed task information and information including the decision-maker for that task only to the shared terminal 14 instead of the user terminal 12, and have it displayed on its display unit. This can facilitate communication between multiple users.

[0036] If task information sent from user terminal 12 is not accepted (N in S10), the processing from S11 onwards is skipped. The information processing device 16 repeatedly executes the process shown in Figure 3. Therefore, the entry receiving unit 42 of the information processing device 16 accepts each user's entry for decision-making on a new task each time a new task requiring decision-making is registered.

[0037] According to the information processing device 16 of the first embodiment, a group of users is formed for each task, which serves as the population from which decision-makers are selected. The priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 determines the priority of each user for decision-making within the user group for each task. Even if the first user group that entered the decision-making process for the first task and the second user group that entered the second task are the same, the priority determination unit 44 determines the priority of each user belonging to the second user group, without depending on the priority determination result of each user belonging to the first user group. It can be said that the priority determination unit 44 independently determines the priority of each user for each task (in other words, for each user group). This can suppress feelings of unfairness in decision-making among multiple users and can also suppress feelings of guilt from the selected decision-maker.

[0038] The present disclosure has been described above based on the first embodiment. The first embodiment is illustrative, and it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various modifications are possible for each component or combination of processing steps of the first embodiment, and that such modifications are also within the scope of the present disclosure.

[0039] <First variation> A first modification relating to the first embodiment will now be described. If a task is registered by a specific user among the group of users who entered into the decision-making process for that task, the priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 may lower the priority assigned to that specific user. For example, the priority determination unit 44 may assign a lower priority to the above-mentioned specific user (i.e., the task registrant) among the group of users than to other users in the group of users.

[0040] In the example shown in Figure 4, the priority determination unit 44 may set the priority of the mother, who is the task registrant, to the lowest priority regardless of the difference between the entry date and time and the mother's event date. The priority determination unit 44 may also set the highest priority to one of the father and son (excluding the mother) and the second highest priority to the other. According to the first modified example, feelings of unfairness in decision-making can be suppressed, and feelings of guilt in the selected decision-maker can be suppressed.

[0041] <Second variation> A second modification relating to the first embodiment will now be described. As previously stated, the task information storage unit 32 of the information processing device 16 stores information about the registrant of each of the multiple tasks. The priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 may lower the priority of a registrant in the decision-making process for tasks registered by a registrant if the task registration status by that registrant satisfies predetermined conditions. The priority determination unit 44 may set the priority of a registrant who satisfies the above conditions lower than the priority of the registrant before the above conditions were met. Furthermore, the priority determination unit 44 may set the priority of a registrant who satisfies the above conditions lower than the priority of users other than the registrant. The conditions for lowering priority may be determined based on the developer's knowledge or experiments using the decision support system 10. For example, the condition for lowering priority may be that the number of tasks registered by one registrant exceeds a predetermined threshold.

[0042] As a specific example, when determining the priority of a task as shown in Figure 4, the priority determination unit 44 may refer to the task information storage unit 32 and count the number of times the mother, who is the registrant of the task, has registered tasks to date (for example, the number of registrations that include the task in question). If the number of times the mother has registered tasks to date exceeds a predetermined threshold, the priority determination unit 44 may set the mother's priority to the lowest priority, regardless of the magnitude of the difference between the entry date and time and the mother's event schedule. The priority determination unit 44 may also set the highest priority to one of the father and son excluding the mother, and the second highest priority to the other. According to the second modified example, feelings of unfairness in decision-making can be suppressed, and feelings of guilt in the selected decision-maker can be suppressed.

[0043] <Third variation> A third modification relating to the first embodiment will now be described. As previously stated, a task for which the information processing device 16 assists in decision-making may be a task registered by any of the users who have entered the decision-making process for the task. The notification unit 46 of the information processing device 16 may notify a user other than the person who registered the task of information regarding the priority of a decision-making process for a given task. In the example shown in Figure 4, the notification unit 46 may send information indicating that the decision-maker has chosen the father, and information indicating the priority of each user who has entered the process, to the terminals of users other than the mother who registered the task (for example, at least one of the father and son) for display as information regarding priority. According to the third modification, communication between users who have entered the decision-making process for the same task can be facilitated.

[0044] In another embodiment, the notification unit 46 may notify a user other than the decision-maker for that task (the father in the example of Figure 4) (at least one of the mother and son in the example of Figure 4) of the priority of decision-making for a certain task. In yet another embodiment, the notification unit 46 may notify a user other than the person who registered the task and also other than the decision-maker for that task (only the son in the example of Figure 4) of the priority of decision-making for a certain task. These embodiments also facilitate communication among users who have entered into the decision-making process for the same task.

[0045] <Fourth variation> A fourth modification relating to the first embodiment will now be described. The information processing device 16 may further include a user group reset unit. The user group reset unit may reset the user groups that have entered each of the multiple tasks when the processing related to the decision-making for each task is completed (for example, when the determination and notification of priority is completed). Resetting the user group may mean, for example, dissolving the set of decision-making members (user group) composed of multiple entrants (users) for each task. According to the fourth modification, it becomes easier to obtain a new user group (in other words, a user group with a different configuration) for each task, and it becomes easier to avoid bias in the decision-makers.

[0046] <Fifth variation> A fifth modification relating to the first embodiment will now be described. The notification unit 46 of the information processing device 16 may transmit information indicating the user who has become the decision-maker (referred to here as "notification information") to the terminal (one user terminal 12) of at least one user who has been determined to be the decision-maker among the group of users who have entered the target task. The notification information may include an element for releasing decision-making authority (e.g., a release button). If this element is selected by the decision-maker, the decision-maker's terminal may transmit information to the information processing device 16 indicating that it is releasing decision-making authority.

[0047] When information indicating the release of decision-making authority is received from the terminal of the decision-maker, the priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 may re-determine the priority among the new group of users, excluding the user who released decision-making authority (in other words, the previous decision-maker) from the group of users who entered the target task. Alternatively, the priority determination unit 44 may determine the user who is given the next highest priority after the user who released decision-making authority as the new decision-maker. According to the fifth modification, by allowing decision-makers to release decision-making authority, feelings of unfairness in decision-making can be further suppressed, and feelings of guilt in those who have been granted decision-making authority can be further suppressed.

[0048] <Sixth variation> A sixth modification relating to the first embodiment will now be described. In the first embodiment, the priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 determined the priority of each user for task decision-making using the difference between the task entry deadline and the event schedule for each user who entered as a parameter. As a modification, the priority determination unit 44 may determine the priority of each user based on other types of parameters, in other words, according to other rules or algorithms. For example, the priority determination unit 44 may obtain random values ​​for each user who entered using a random number generator and determine the priority of each user based on each user's random value.

[0049] Furthermore, the priority determination unit 44 may determine the priority of each user using multiple types of parameters. For example, the priority determination unit 44 may use the difference between the task entry deadline and the event schedule for each user who has entered as the first parameter, and the random value for each user output by the random number generator as the second parameter to determine the priority of each user. For example, the priority determination unit 44 may determine the priority of each user based on the first parameter and the priority of each user based on the second parameter, and then determine the decision-maker based on the average of the user priorities.

[0050] <Second Embodiment> The second embodiment of this disclosure will be described focusing on the differences from the first embodiment, with explanations of common points omitted as appropriate. It goes without saying that the components of the second embodiment can be combined with any components of the first embodiment or its modified forms. Components of the second embodiment that are identical or corresponding to components of the first embodiment will be appropriately denoted by the same reference numerals in the description.

[0051] The configuration of the decision support system 10 in the second embodiment is the same as the configuration of the decision support system 10 in the first embodiment shown in Figure 1. The information processing device 16 in the second embodiment differs from the information processing device 16 in the first embodiment in that it determines the priority of each user in the current case based on the history of priorities previously assigned to each user, so as to equalize the priorities of each user.

[0052] Figure 5 is a block diagram showing the functional blocks of the information processing device 16 of the second embodiment. The information processing device 16 of the second embodiment includes a priority information storage unit 34 in addition to the functional blocks of the information processing device 16 of the first embodiment.

[0053] The priority information storage unit 34 of the information processing device 16 stores information regarding the priority of each user determined by the priority determination unit 44 (hereinafter also referred to as "priority history") for each user group configuration. In the case of a family of four consisting of a father, mother, son, and daughter, the priority information storage unit 34 may store the priority history of each user for user group A (father, mother, son), user group B (father, mother, son, daughter), user group C (son, daughter), etc. The priority history may include the number of times each user has been assigned the highest priority, or in other words, the number of times they have been selected as the decision-maker. The priority history may also include the average value of priorities determined in one or more tasks, or in other words, the average priority determined in one or more tasks.

[0054] The priority determination unit 44 of the information processing device 16 equalizes the priority assigned to each user based on the priority history stored in the priority information storage unit 34. Specifically, the priority determination unit 44 refers to the task information in the task information storage unit 32 and detects if the first group of users who entered the decision-making process for the first task and the second group of users who entered the decision-making process for a second task different from the first task have the same configuration. If the first group of users and the second group of users have the same configuration, the priority determination unit 44 determines the priority of each user in the second group so that the priority of each user is equalized based on the priority of each user determined for the first group, as indicated by the priority history in the priority information storage unit 34.

[0055] Figure 6 shows an example of priority transfer. When determining the priority of the user group that entered Task 1, "Decide where to go to eat with family," the priority history of user group A is not recorded in the priority information storage unit 34. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among all the entered users (father, mother, son) and stores the priority history indicating that the mother became the decision-maker (in Figure 6) in the priority information storage unit 34, associating it with user group A.

[0056] Subsequently, when determining the priority of the user group that entered Task 4, "Decide on a summer vacation destination," the composition of this user group is the same as that of the user group that entered Task 1. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 refers to the priority history associated with user group A. This priority history records that the number of times the decision-maker has been selected is 1 for the mother, and 0 each for the father and son. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among the father and son, excluding the mother, and (in Figure 6) records information indicating that the father has become the decision-maker in the priority history associated with user group A.

[0057] Subsequently, when determining the priority of the user group that entered Task 6, "Decide on a destination for your next holiday drive," the priority determination unit 44 refers to the priority history associated with user group A, since the composition of this user group is the same as that of the user group that entered Task 1, etc. This priority history records that the father and mother have been selected as decision-makers once each, and the son has been selected zero times. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines that the son is the decision-maker and records information indicating that the son has become the decision-maker in the priority history associated with user group A.

[0058] Subsequently, when determining the priority of the user group that entered Task 7, "Decide what to buy as a birthday present for your daughter," the composition of this user group is the same as that of the user group that entered Task 1, etc. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 refers to the priority history associated with user group A. This priority history records that the number of times the father, mother, and son have been selected as decision-makers is once, and there is no difference in the number of times the users have been selected as decision-makers. For this reason, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among all the entered users (father, mother, son) and records information indicating that the son has become the decision-maker (in Figure 6) in the priority history associated with user group A.

[0059] Subsequently, when determining the priority of the user group that entered Task 9, "Decide where to go to eat with family," the composition of this user group is the same as that of the user group that entered Task 1, etc., so the priority determination unit 44 refers to the priority history associated with user group A. This priority history records that the son was selected as the decision-maker twice, and the father and mother were each selected once. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among the father and mother, excluding the son, and (in Figure 6) records information indicating that the father became the decision-maker in the priority history associated with user group A.

[0060] According to the information processing device 16 of the second embodiment, when the configuration of the user group that entered the decision-making process is the same, the priority information previously set for each user in that user group is carried over, making it easier to equalize the priority for each user. This can suppress feelings of unfairness in decision-making and also suppress feelings of guilt among the selected decision-makers.

[0061] The present disclosure has been described above based on the second embodiment. The second embodiment is illustrative, and it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various modifications are possible for each component or combination of processing steps of the second embodiment, and that such modifications are also within the scope of the present disclosure.

[0062] <First variation> A first modification relating to the second embodiment will now be described. In the second embodiment, the priority history was inherited based on the identity of the user group, but as a modification, the priority history may be inherited based on the identity of the task. Specifically, the priority information storage unit 34 of the information processing device 16 may store information (priority history) regarding the priority of each user determined by the priority determination unit 44 for each task. The priority determination unit 44 may determine the priority of each user regarding the second decision in a task, based on the priority of each user determined regarding the first decision in a task as shown in the priority history of the priority information storage unit 34, so as to equalize the priority of each user.

[0063] For example, in the example in Figure 6, let's assume that Task 1 and Task 9 are the same task (hereinafter also referred to as the "continuing task"), with Task 1 being the first decision-making and Task 9 being the second decision-making. When determining the priority of the group of users who entered Task 1, the priority history for the continuing task is not recorded in the priority information storage unit 34. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among all the entered users (father, mother, son) and stores the priority history indicating that (in Figure 6) the mother became the decision-maker in the priority information storage unit 34, associating it with the target task.

[0064] Subsequently, when determining the priority of the group of users who have entered Task 9, the priority determination unit 44 refers to the priority history associated with the continuing task. This priority history records that the mother has been selected once as the decision-maker. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among the father and son, excluding the mother, and (in Figure 6) records information indicating that the father has become the decision-maker in the priority history corresponding to the target task.

[0065] Furthermore, in the example in Figure 6, Task 4 and Task 8 are assumed to be the same continuous task, "Deciding on a travel destination," with Task 4 being the first decision-making and Task 8 being the second decision-making. When determining the priority of the group of users who entered Task 4, the priority history for the continuous task is not recorded in the priority information storage unit 34. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among all the entered users (father, mother, son), and stores the priority history indicating that (in Figure 6) the father became the decision-maker in the priority information storage unit 34, associating it with the target task.

[0066] Subsequently, when determining the priority of the group of users who have entered Task 8, the priority determination unit 44 refers to the priority history associated with the continuing task. This priority history records that the father has been selected as the decision-maker once. Therefore, the priority determination unit 44 determines the decision-maker from among the mother and daughter, excluding the father, and (in Figure 6) records information indicating that the mother has become the decision-maker in the priority history corresponding to the target task.

[0067] According to this modified version, by transferring the previously set priority information to each user for each task requiring decision-making, it becomes easier to equalize the priorities of each user. This can reduce feelings of unfairness in decision-making and prevent selected decision-makers from feeling guilty.

[0068] <Second variation> A second modification relating to the second embodiment will now be described. In this modification, the priority history is inherited based on the identity of the task and the identity of the user group. Specifically, the priority information storage unit 34 of the information processing device 16 may determine the priority of each user in the second user group so that the priority of each user is equalized based on the priority of each user determined for the first user group, when the first user group that entered the first decision-making for a certain task and the second user group that entered the second decision-making for the same task have the same configuration.

[0069] In the example in Figure 6, even though Task 4 and Task 8 are the same continuing task, "Deciding on a travel destination," the user group for Task 4 and the user group for Task 8 have different compositions, so the priority history is not carried over. On the other hand, in the example in Figure 6, if Task 1 and Task 9 are the same continuing task, the user group for Task 1 and the user group for Task 9 have the same composition, so the priority history is carried over. The specific processing for Task 1 and Task 9 is the same as in the first modified example, so the explanation is omitted. In the second modified example as well, it becomes easier to equalize the priorities of each user, which can suppress feelings of unfairness in decision-making and also suppress feelings of guilt among the selected decision-makers.

[0070] Any combination of the above-described embodiments and modifications is also useful as an embodiment of this disclosure. The new embodiments resulting from such combinations will possess the combined effects of the respective embodiments and modifications. Furthermore, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the functions to be performed by each component described in the claims can be achieved by each component shown in the embodiments and modifications individually or in combination thereof. In addition, where terms such as "first," "second," etc. are used in this specification or in the claims, unless otherwise specified, they do not indicate any order or importance, but are used to distinguish one configuration from another.

[0071] <Note> Based on the above description of embodiments and modifications, the following technology is disclosed. [Technology 1] Obtain information regarding matters for which decisions should be made. We accept user entries for decision-making regarding the aforementioned matters. Determine the priority of the decision-making process for each of the one or more users who have entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matters. For each matter requiring a decision, user entries for decision-making will be accepted. A decision support method in which a computer performs the task. This decision-making support method accepts user entries for each matter requiring a decision (e.g., a task), forms a new group of users (in other words, a population for priority determination) to determine priorities, and then determines the priority of each user within that new group. This helps to reduce feelings of unfairness in decision-making and also reduces feelings of guilt among selected decision-makers. [Technology 2] Even if the first group of users who entered the decision-making process for the first matter and the second group of users who entered the decision-making process for the second matter, which is different from the first matter, have the same configuration, the decision-making priority for the second group of users is determined without depending on the decision-making priority determined for the first group of users. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method involves forming independent user groups for each matter requiring decision-making (e.g., tasks), and independently determining the priority of each user in the decision-making process for each user group (in other words, each task). This helps to mitigate feelings of unfairness in decision-making. [Technology 3] If the aforementioned item was registered by a specific user among the group of users who entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned item, the priority of the decision-making process for the aforementioned item with respect to that specific user shall be lowered. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method can reduce feelings of unfairness in decision-making and prevent selected decision-makers from feeling guilty. [Technology 4] The system stores information about the registered individuals for each of the multiple matters that require decision-making. If a certain registrant's registration status for an item meets certain conditions, the priority of that registrant in decision-making regarding the item they registered will be reduced. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method can reduce feelings of unfairness in decision-making and prevent selected decision-makers from feeling guilty. [Technology 5] The aforementioned information was registered by one of the users who entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned information. Information regarding the priority of decision-making for the aforementioned matters will be notified to a user different from the person who registered for the aforementioned matters. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method facilitates communication among users who have entered into a decision-making process for the same matter. [Technology 6] The system stores the entry deadline for the decision regarding the aforementioned matter, and the event dates for each of the multiple users who entered the decision regarding the aforementioned matter. Users whose entry deadline and event date are the least likely to be given priority will be given higher priority. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method makes it easier for each user to understand and accept the priorities assigned to them. [Technology 7] The user groups that have entered each of the multiple items requiring decision-making are reset once the decision-making process for each item is complete. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method makes it easier to acquire new user groups (in other words, user groups with different configurations) for each matter requiring decision-making (e.g., tasks), and also makes it easier to avoid bias in the decision-making process. [Technology 8] When information is received from a user who has been granted decision-making authority regarding the aforementioned matter, indicating that the user who released the decision-making authority will be released, the priority of the decision-making regarding the aforementioned matter will be determined from a new group of users, excluding the user who released the decision-making authority from the group of users who entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matter. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method allows users who have been granted decision-making authority to release that authority, thereby further reducing feelings of unfairness in decision-making and further reducing feelings of guilt among those who have been granted decision-making authority. [Technology 9] For each user group configuration, information regarding the determined priority of each user is stored. If the configuration of the first group of users who entered the decision-making process for the first matter and the second group of users who entered the decision-making process for the second matter, which is different from the first matter, are the same, then the priority of each user in the second group of users is determined based on the priority of each user determined for the first group of users, so as to equalize the priority of each user. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method makes it easier to equalize the priorities of each user by transferring the previously set priority information to each user in a group of users that have entered the decision-making process and whose composition is the same. This can reduce feelings of unfairness in decision-making and prevent selected decision-makers from feeling guilty. [Technology 10] For each decision that needs to be made, the system stores information about the priority of each user that has been determined. Based on the priority of each user determined with respect to a first decision on a certain matter, the priority of each user is determined for a second decision on the same matter, such that the priority of each user is leveled out. The decision support method described in Technology 1. This decision-making support method makes it easier to equalize the priorities of each user by transferring information about the priorities they have previously set for each decision they need to make. This helps to reduce feelings of unfairness in decision-making and also helps to prevent selected decision-makers from feeling guilty. [Technology 11] An acquisition unit that acquires information on matters for which decisions should be made, An entry reception unit that accepts user entries for decision-making regarding the aforementioned matters, A priority determination unit that determines the priority of the decision-making process for each of the one or more users who have entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matters, Equipped with, The aforementioned entry reception unit accepts user entries for decision-making for each matter requiring a decision. Information processing device. According to this information processing device, similar to the decision support method of Technology 1, it is possible to suppress feelings of unfairness in decision-making and to suppress feelings of guilt among selected decision-makers. [Technology 12] Obtain information regarding matters for which decisions should be made. We accept user entries for decision-making regarding the aforementioned matters. Determine the priority of the decision-making process for each of the one or more users who have entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matters. For each matter requiring a decision, user entries for decision-making will be accepted. A computer program that causes a computer to perform a task. According to this computer program, similar to the decision support method of Technology 1, it is possible to suppress feelings of unfairness in decision-making and to suppress feelings of guilt among selected decision-makers. [Explanation of Symbols]

[0072] 10 Decision support system, 16 Information processing device, 30 User information storage unit, 32 Task information storage unit, 34 Priority information storage unit, 40 Acquisition unit, 42 Entry reception unit, 44 Priority determination unit, 46 Notification unit.

Claims

1. Obtain information regarding matters for which decisions should be made. We accept user entries for decision-making regarding the aforementioned matters. Determine the priority of the decision-making process for each of the one or more users who have entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matters. For each matter requiring a decision, user entries for decision-making will be accepted. A decision support method in which a computer performs the task.

2. Even if the first group of users who entered the decision-making process for the first matter and the second group of users who entered the decision-making process for a second matter different from the first matter have the same configuration, the priority of the decision-making process for the second group of users is determined without depending on the priority of the decision-making process determined for the first group of users. The decision support method according to claim 1.

3. If the aforementioned item was registered by a specific user among the group of users who entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned item, the priority of the decision-making process for the aforementioned item with respect to that specific user shall be lowered. The decision support method according to claim 1.

4. The system stores information about the registered individuals for each of the multiple matters that require decision-making. If a certain registrant's registration status for an item meets certain conditions, the priority of that registrant in decision-making regarding the item they registered will be reduced. The decision support method according to claim 1.

5. The aforementioned information was registered by one of the users who entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned information. Information regarding the priority of decision-making for the aforementioned matters will be notified to a user different from the person who registered for the aforementioned matters. The decision support method according to claim 1.

6. The system stores the entry deadline for the decision regarding the aforementioned matter, and the event dates for each of the multiple users who entered the decision regarding the aforementioned matter. Users whose entry deadline and event date are the least likely to be given priority will be given higher priority. The decision support method according to claim 1.

7. The user groups that have entered each of the multiple items requiring decision-making are reset once the decision-making process for each item is complete. The decision support method according to claim 1.

8. When information is received from a user who has been granted decision-making authority regarding the aforementioned matter, indicating that the user who released the decision-making authority will be released, the priority of the decision-making regarding the aforementioned matter will be determined from a new group of users, excluding the user who released the decision-making authority from the group of users who entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matter. The decision support method according to claim 1.

9. For each user group configuration, information regarding the determined priority of each user is stored. If the configuration of the first group of users who entered the decision-making process for the first matter and the second group of users who entered the decision-making process for the second matter, which is different from the first matter, are the same, then the priority of each user in the second group of users is determined based on the priority of each user determined for the first group of users, so as to equalize the priority of each user. The decision support method according to claim 1.

10. For each decision that needs to be made, the system stores information about the priority of each user that has been determined. Based on the priority of each user determined with respect to a first decision on a certain matter, the priority of each user is determined for a second decision on the same matter, such that the priority of each user is leveled out. The decision support method according to claim 1.

11. An acquisition unit that acquires information on matters for which decisions should be made, An entry reception unit that accepts user entries for decision-making regarding the aforementioned matters, A priority determination unit that determines the priority of the decision-making process for each of the one or more users who have entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matters, Equipped with, The aforementioned entry reception unit accepts user entries for decision-making for each matter requiring a decision. Information processing device.

12. Obtain information regarding matters for which decisions should be made. We accept user entries for decision-making regarding the aforementioned matters. Determine the priority of the decision-making process for each of the one or more users who have entered the decision-making process for the aforementioned matters. For each matter requiring a decision, user entries for decision-making will be accepted. A computer program that causes a computer to perform a task.

Images