Recent multi-criteria group decision making methods focus their analysis on the experts preferences. They do not take into account the reasons why each expert has provided a specific set of preferences. In this paper, a method that introduces novel measures capable of explaining the reasons behind experts decisions is presented. A novel concept, the arguments are presented. They represent thhe experts have for maintaining a certain position in the debate. Several measures related to the arguments are proposed. These new argumentation measures, along with consensus measures, help us to get a clear idea about how and why a specific resolution has been reached. They help us to determine which is the most influential expert, that is, the expert whose contributions to the debate have inspired the rest. Also, the proposed method allows us to determine which are the arguments that most of the experts have followed. A clear overview about how the debate is evolving in terms of arguments is also provided. The novel presented analysis indicate how the experts change their opinions in every round and what was the reason for it, which changes have occurred between rounds and they also provide global analysis results.

最近的多标准群体决策方法将分析重点放在专家偏好上。他们没有考虑每个专家提供一组特定偏好的原因。在本文中，提出了一种方法，该方法引入了能够解释专家决策背后原因的新措施。一个新颖的概念，提出了论点。他们代表了专家在辩论中保持一定的立场。提出了与这些论点相关的若干措施。这些新的论证措施以及共识措施有助于我们清楚地了解如何以及为何达成特定决议。它们帮助我们确定谁是最有影响力的专家，即对辩论的贡献启发了其余专家的专家。还，建议的方法使我们能够确定大多数专家遵循的论点。还提供了关于辩论如何在论点方面演变的清晰概述。新颖的呈现分析表明了专家在每一轮中如何改变他们的观点及其原因是什么，在几轮之间发生了哪些变化，他们还提供了全局分析结果。