Bergeron et al. [ 16] proposed a model to represent the universe of solutions in a compact way, grouping solutions into classes of equivalence, also called traces.
The first individual and group solutions would represent the exploration phase, leading to a group solution, where discussions integrated loose theories and concepts, presenting the integration phase in practical inquiry.
It examines the changes in the proximity (similarity) of individual decision makers' solutions to a group solution as a function of information load.
Stage 3: During the final stage of back-reconstruction to the original dimensionality, individual subject image maps and time courses were estimated using the group solution [21], [22].
The BIC suggested a 4- or 5-group solution.
Although the 4- and 5-group solutions showed uneven patterns we did not identify further descriptive value than what the 3-group solution produced.
Hence, we identified distinctions in the 3-group solution that were missed in the 2-group solution and which we considered possibly meaningful.
ENT indicated that the 2-group solution had the best discrimination amongst the groups.
Since the 2-group solution did not capture the uneven pattern of the 3-group solution, and 4-, 5-, 6- and 7- group solutions included groups representing very small proportions of the sample, we judged that the 3-group model provided the best balance of descriptive value, parsimony, and likely robustness and thus used it for further analysis.
The 2-group solution consisted of a majority high-wellbeing and an approximately 20% low-wellbeing group; however, this model did not identify some features that were apparent in the 3-group solution.
