IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v291y2021i2p738-756.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pairwise comparison tables within the deck of cards method in multiple criteria decision aiding

Author

Listed:
  • Corrente, S.
  • Figueira, J.R.
  • Greco, S.

Abstract

This paper deals with an improved version of the deck of cards method to render the construction of ratio and interval scales more “accurate” compared to the ones built in the original version. The improvement comes from the fact that we can account for a richer and finer preference information provided by the decision-maker, which permits a more accurate modeling of the strength of preference between different levels of a scale. Instead of considering only the number of blank cards between consecutive positions in the ranking of objects, such as criteria and scale levels, we consider also the number of blank cards between not consecutive positions in the ranking. This information is collected in a pairwise comparison table that is not necessarily built with precise values. We can consider imprecise information provided in the form of intervals and missing values. Since the provided information is not necessarily consistent, we propose also some procedures to help the decision-maker to make consistent her evaluations in a co-constructive way interacting with an analyst and reflecting and revising her judgments. A didactic example will illustrate the application of the method.

Suggested Citation

  • Corrente, S. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S., 2021. "Pairwise comparison tables within the deck of cards method in multiple criteria decision aiding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 738-756.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:291:y:2021:i:2:p:738-756
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2020.09.036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221720308407
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.09.036?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 700-710, April.
    2. Jacquet-Lagreze, E. & Siskos, J., 1982. "Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 151-164, June.
    3. Lahdelma, Risto & Hokkanen, Joonas & Salminen, Pekka, 1998. "SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 137-143, April.
    4. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, December.
    5. Robert L. Smith, 1984. "Efficient Monte Carlo Procedures for Generating Points Uniformly Distributed over Bounded Regions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 1296-1308, December.
    6. Greco, Salvatore & Mousseau, Vincent & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Ordinal regression revisited: Multiple criteria ranking using a set of additive value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 416-436, December.
    7. van Valkenhoef, Gert & Tervonen, Tommi & Postmus, Douwe, 2014. "Notes on ‘Hit-And-Run enables efficient weight generation for simulation-based multiple criteria decision analysis’," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 865-867.
    8. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    9. Salvatore Corrente & Salvatore Greco & Roman Słowiński, 2019. "Robust Ranking of Universities Evaluated by Hierarchical and Interacting Criteria," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Sandra Huber & Martin Josef Geiger & Adiel Teixeira de Almeida (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Making and Aiding, pages 145-192, Springer.
    10. Tervonen, Tommi & van Valkenhoef, Gert & Baştürk, Nalan & Postmus, Douwe, 2013. "Hit-And-Run enables efficient weight generation for simulation-based multiple criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(3), pages 552-559.
    11. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2008. "A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 1422-1428, June.
    12. Fischer, Gregory W., 1995. "Range Sensitivity of Attribute Weights in Multiattribute Value Models," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 252-266, June.
    13. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
    14. Siskos, Eleftherios & Tsotsolas, Nikos, 2015. "Elicitation of criteria importance weights through the Simos method: A robustness concern," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(2), pages 543-553.
    15. Lootsma, F. A., 1989. "Conflict resolution via pairwise comparison of concessions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 109-116, May.
    16. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    18. Bernard Roy, 2005. "Paradigms and Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 3-24, Springer.
    19. Figueira, Jose & Roy, Bernard, 2002. "Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos' procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 317-326, June.
    20. Goldstein, William M., 1990. "Judgments of relative importance in decision making: Global vs local interpretations of subjective weight," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 313-336, December.
    21. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    22. Carlos A. Bana e Costa & Jean-Marie De Corte & Jean-Claude Vansnick, 2016. "On the Mathematical Foundations of MACBETH," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 421-463, Springer.
    23. Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Martin Weber, 1993. "The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(8), pages 937-943, August.
    24. 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.
    25. Fasolo, Barbara & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2014. "Tailoring value elicitation to decision makers' numeracy and fluency: Expressing value judgments in numbers or words," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 83-90.
    26. Takeda, Eiji & Yu, Po-Lung, 1995. "Assessing priority weights from subsets of pairwise comparisons in multiple criteria optimization problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 315-331, October.
    27. Tommi Pajala & Pekka Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius, 2019. "Judgments of importance revisited: What do they mean?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(7), pages 1140-1148, July.
    28. Roy, Bernard, 1993. "Decision science or decision-aid science?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 184-203, April.
    29. Grabisch, Michel, 1996. "The application of fuzzy integrals in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 445-456, March.
    30. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2017. "A robust ranking method extending ELECTRE III to hierarchy of interacting criteria, imprecise weights and stochastic analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-17.
    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. Figueira, José Rui & Oliveira, Henrique M. & Serro, Ana Paula & Colaço, Rogério & Froes, Filipe & Robalo Cordeiro, Carlos & Diniz, António & Guimarães, Miguel, 2023. "A multiple criteria approach for building a pandemic impact assessment composite indicator: The case of COVID-19 in Portugal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(2), pages 795-818.
    2. Gregório, Beatriz Cagigal & Pereira, Miguel Alves & Costa, Ana Sara, 2024. "Multi-criteria decision-aiding for public hospitals: The role of interactions among pairs of access and quality criteria," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    3. Pereira, André Alves & Pereira, Miguel Alves, 2023. "Energy storage strategy analysis based on the Choquet multi-criteria preference aggregation model: The Portuguese case," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Roy, Bernard, 2022. "Electre-Score: A first outranking based method for scoring actions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 986-1005.
    5. Vilarinho, Hermilio & Pereira, Miguel Alves & D’Inverno, Giovanna & Nóvoa, Henriqueta & Camanho, Ana S., 2024. "Water Utility Service Quality Index: A customer-centred approach for assessing the quality of service in the water sector," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    6. Dinis, Duarte Caldeira & Figueira, José Rui & Teixeira, Ângelo Palos, 2023. "A multiple criteria approach for ship risk classification: An alternative to the Paris MoU Ship Risk Profile," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    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. Ciomek, Krzysztof & Kadziński, Miłosz & Tervonen, Tommi, 2017. "Heuristics for selecting pair-wise elicitation questions in multiple criteria choice problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 693-707.
    2. Costa, Ana Sara & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Borbinha, José, 2020. "A robust hierarchical nominal multicriteria classification method based on similarity and dissimilarity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(3), pages 986-1001.
    3. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2010. "A comparative assessment of thin-film photovoltaic production processes using the ELECTRE III method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 463-474, January.
    4. Ciomek, Krzysztof & Kadziński, Miłosz & Tervonen, Tommi, 2017. "Heuristics for prioritizing pair-wise elicitation questions with additive multi-attribute value models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 27-45.
    5. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2017. "A robust ranking method extending ELECTRE III to hierarchy of interacting criteria, imprecise weights and stochastic analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Arcidiacono, Sally Giuseppe & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2021. "Robust stochastic sorting with interacting criteria hierarchically structured," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 735-754.
    7. Francesca Abastante & Salvatore Corrente & Salvatore Greco & Isabella M. Lami & Beatrice Mecca, 2022. "The introduction of the SRF-II method to compare hypothesis of adaptive reuse for an iconic historical building," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2397-2436, July.
    8. Angilella, Silvia & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2015. "Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis for the Choquet integral preference model and the scale construction problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 172-182.
    9. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    10. Brunelli, Matteo & Corrente, Salvatore, 2024. "Modeling criteria and project interactions in portfolio decision analysis with the Choquet integral," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    11. Vetschera, Rudolf, 2017. "Deriving rankings from incomplete preference information: A comparison of different approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(1), pages 244-253.
    12. Angilella, Silvia & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2016. "Robust Ordinal Regression and Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis in multiple criteria hierarchy process for the Choquet integral preference model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 154-169.
    13. Arcidiacono, Sally Giuseppe & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2024. "Inducing a probability distribution in Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    14. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    15. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    16. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    17. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2019. "Sigma-Mu efficiency analysis: A methodology for evaluating units through composite indicators," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 942-960.
    18. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    19. Ru, Zice & Liu, Jiapeng & Kadziński, Miłosz & Liao, Xiuwu, 2022. "Bayesian ordinal regression for multiple criteria choice and ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 600-620.
    20. Ioannis Kougkoulos & M. Selim Cakir & Nathan Kunz & Doreen S. Boyd & Alexander Trautrims & Kornilia Hatzinikolaou & Stefan Gold, 2021. "A Multi‐Method Approach to Prioritize Locations of Labor Exploitation for Ground‐Based Interventions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(12), pages 4396-4411, December.

    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:291:y:2021:i:2:p:738-756. 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.