IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v194y2009i2p464-473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling subjective evaluation for fuzzy group multicriteria decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Yeh, Chung-Hsing
  • Chang, Yu-Hern

Abstract

This paper presents a new fuzzy multicriteria decision making (MCDM) approach for evaluating decision alternatives involving subjective judgements made by a group of decision makers. A pairwise comparison process is used to help individual decision makers make comparative judgements, and a linguistic rating method is used for making absolute judgements. A hierarchical weighting method is developed to assess the weights of a large number of evaluation criteria by pairwise comparisons. To reflect the inherent imprecision of subjective judgements, individual assessments are aggregated as a group assessment using triangular fuzzy numbers. To obtain a cardinal preference value for each decision alternative, a new fuzzy MCDM algorithm is developed by extending the concept of the degree of optimality to incorporate criteria weights in the distance measurement. An empirical study of aircraft selection is presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Chang, Yu-Hern, 2009. "Modeling subjective evaluation for fuzzy group multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(2), pages 464-473, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:194:y:2009:i:2:p:464-473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(08)00004-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & J. Willis, Robert & Deng, Hepu & Pan, Hongqi, 1999. "Task oriented weighting in multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 130-146, November.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    3. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2007. "Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(2), pages 514-529, April.
    4. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2004. "A new airline safety index," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 369-383, May.
    5. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    6. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    7. Liang, Gin-Shuh, 1999. "Fuzzy MCDM based on ideal and anti-ideal concepts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 682-691, February.
    8. Bose, Utpal & Davey, Anne M. & Olson, David L., 1997. "Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 691-706, December.
    9. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Kuo, Yu-Liang, 2003. "Evaluating passenger services of Asia-Pacific international airports," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 35-48, January.
    10. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, September.
    11. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2002. "A survey analysis of service quality for domestic airlines," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 166-177, May.
    12. James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Jyrki Wallenius & Stanley Zionts, 1992. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: The Next Ten Years," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 645-654, May.
    13. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    14. Gonzalez-Pachon, Jacinto & Romero, Carlos, 2004. "A method for dealing with inconsistencies in pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 351-361, October.
    15. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    16. Olcer, A. I. & Odabasi, A. Y., 2005. "A new fuzzy multiple attributive group decision making methodology and its application to propulsion/manoeuvring system selection problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 93-114, October.
    17. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    18. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene, 2006. "Development of an indicator model and ranking of sustainable revitalization alternatives of derelict property: a Lithuanian case study," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 287-299.
    19. Patrick T. Harker & Luis G. Vargas, 1987. "The Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1383-1403, November.
    20. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    21. Salo, Ahti A. & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 1995. "Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 458-475, May.
    22. Ahti A. Salo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 1992. "Preference Assessment by Imprecise Ratio Statements," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 1053-1061, December.
    23. Matsatsinis, Nikolaos F. & Samaras, Andreas P., 2001. "MCDA and preference disaggregation in group decision support systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 414-429, April.
    24. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Deng, Hepu & Chang, Yu-Hern, 2000. "Fuzzy multicriteria analysis for performance evaluation of bus companies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 459-473, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kiracı, Kasım & Akan, Ercan, 2020. "Aircraft selection by applying AHP and TOPSIS in interval type-2 fuzzy sets," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    3. S. Meysam Mousavi & Fariborz Jolai & Reza Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, 2013. "A Fuzzy Stochastic Multi-Attribute Group Decision-Making Approach for Selection Problems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 207-233, March.
    4. Bottomley, Paul A. & Doyle, John R., 2013. "Comparing the validity of numerical judgements elicited by direct rating and point allocation: Insights from objectively verifiable perceptual tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 148-157.
    5. Ye, Jun, 2010. "Fuzzy decision-making method based on the weighted correlation coefficient under intuitionistic fuzzy environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(1), pages 202-204, August.
    6. Gao, Fei & Wang, Weixiang & Bi, Chencan & Bi, Wenhao & Zhang, An, 2023. "Prioritization of used aircraft acquisition criteria: A fuzzy best–worst method (BWM)-based approach," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Fu-Ling Cai & Xiuwu Liao & Kan-Liang Wang, 2012. "An interactive sorting approach based on the assignment examples of multiple decision makers with different priorities," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 87-108, August.
    8. Ahmad Alshamrani & Dipanjana Sengupta & Amrit Das & Uttam Kumar Bera & Ibrahim M. Hezam & Moddassir Khan Nayeem & Faisal Aqlan, 2023. "Optimal Design of an Eco-Friendly Transportation Network under Uncertain Parameters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-26, March.
    9. Bağcı, Buğra & Kartal, Murat, 2024. "A combined multi criteria model for aircraft selection problem in airlines," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    10. Majid Zerafat Angiz Langroudi & Ali Emrouznejad & Adli Mustafa & Joshua Ignatius, 2013. "Type-2 TOPSIS: A Group Decision Problem When Ideal Values are not Extreme Endpoints," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 851-866, September.
    11. Dožić, Slavica & Lutovac, Tatjana & Kalić, Milica, 2018. "Fuzzy AHP approach to passenger aircraft type selection," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 165-175.
    12. T. Hlásny & Z. Sitková & I. Barka, 2013. "Regional assessment of forest effect on watershed hydrology: Slovakia as a case study," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(10), pages 405-415.
    13. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Xu, Yan, 2013. "Managing critical success strategies for an enterprise resource planning project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(3), pages 604-614.
    14. Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
    15. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Wu, Pei-Syuan, 2018. "Evaluating airline crisis management performance: The cases of flights GE222 and GE235 crash accidents," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 62-72.
    16. Xu, Yan & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2012. "An integrated approach to evaluation and planning of best practices," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 65-78, January.
    17. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2016. "Managing corporate social responsibility strategies of airports: The case of Taiwan’s Taoyuan International Airport Corporation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 338-348.
    18. Paweł Ziemba & Marek Kannchen & Mariusz Borawski, 2024. "Selection of the Family Electric Car Based on Objective and Subjective Criteria—Analysis of a Case Study of Polish Consumers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-27, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Wang, Shih-Yi, 2007. "A survey and optimization-based evaluation of development strategies for the air cargo industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 550-562, April.
    2. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    3. Kuo, Ming-Shin, 2011. "A novel interval-valued fuzzy MCDM method for improving airlines’ service quality in Chinese cross-strait airlines," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1177-1193.
    4. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2004. "A new airline safety index," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 369-383, May.
    5. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    6. Lupo, Toni, 2015. "Fuzzy ServPerf model combined with ELECTRE III to comparatively evaluate service quality of international airports in Sicily," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 249-259.
    7. Muhammad Ikram & Qingyu Zhang & Robert Sroufe, 2020. "Developing integrated management systems using an AHP‐Fuzzy VIKOR approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2265-2283, September.
    8. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2016. "Managing corporate social responsibility strategies of airports: The case of Taiwan’s Taoyuan International Airport Corporation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 338-348.
    9. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    10. Tom Pape, 2020. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: Concept, measures and application," Papers 2012.13816, arXiv.org.
    11. Pape, Tom, 2017. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: concept, measures and application," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68682, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Juan de Oña & Rocio de Oña, 2015. "Quality of Service in Public Transport Based on Customer Satisfaction Surveys: A Review and Assessment of Methodological Approaches," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 605-622, August.
    13. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    14. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    15. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mariano Jiménez & Mar Arenas-Parra, 2016. "A group decision making model based on goal programming with fuzzy hierarchy: an application to regional forest planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 137-162, October.
    16. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Stefanie Schinke & Ralf H. Kaspar, 2016. "Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 421-457, March.
    17. Huang, Yeu-Shiang & Chang, Wei-Chen & Li, Wei-Hao & Lin, Zu-Liang, 2013. "Aggregation of utility-based individual preferences for group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(2), pages 462-469.
    18. Vizzarri, Corrado & Sangiorgio, Valentino & Fatiguso, Fabio & Calderazzi, Antonella, 2021. "A holistic approach for the adaptive reuse project selection: The case of the former Enel power station in Bari," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    19. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    20. Serafim Opricovic, 2009. "A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(8), pages 1549-1561, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:194:y:2009:i:2:p:464-473. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.