IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0217786.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating mobile services using integrated weighting approach and fuzzy VIKOR

Author

Listed:
  • Yongyoon Suh
  • Yongtae Park
  • Daekook Kang

Abstract

Mobile services’ rapid evolution and development has meant that their evaluation has become a more and more pressing issue, and from both the practical and theoretical standpoints. The significant previous work in the field of multiple-criteria decision-making based evaluation of mobile services has some practical limitations that should be noted. First, there has been insufficient research that has utilized both objective and subjective weighting. Second, the investigations that have employed Vise Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), a well known practical tool for use in multi-criteria decision making, did not consider the fuzzy environment. In order to fill these gaps in the literature, the present study developed fuzzy VIKOR for use with an integrated weighting approach that combines subjective and objective weighting to account for mobile services’ various characteristics and, thereby, evaluate their quality. For subjective weighting, Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) was employed for simple determination of the weighting and causal relationships. For objective weighting of evaluation criteria, Shannon entropy was utilized. This study has a unique contribution in that it reflects the special circumstances of the mobile service evaluation that have not been considered in the previous studies. Especially, in this study, not only the subjective weighting method but also the objective weighting method are used for more accurate importance weight of evaluation criteria. In the novelty aspect, this is the first study trying to utilize fuzzy VIKOR in concert with a novel combined subjective/objective weighting method in order to integrate objective decision-matrix-derived information with subjective decision-maker preferences. Additionally, a supplemental, empirical mobile-service-evaluation case study was conducted that enables researchers and practitioners to better understand the overall, practical evaluation process. Validation of the case study results by comparison with other, representative multiple-criteria decision-making methods verified the proposed method’s robustness.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongyoon Suh & Yongtae Park & Daekook Kang, 2019. "Evaluating mobile services using integrated weighting approach and fuzzy VIKOR," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-28, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0217786
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0217786
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0217786&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0217786?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jieun Kim & Yongtae Park & Chulhyun Kim & Hakyeon Lee, 2014. "Mobile application service networks: Apple’s App Store," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, March.
    2. Chou, Shuo-Yan & Chang, Yao-Hui & Shen, Chun-Ying, 2008. "A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 132-145, August.
    3. Nikou, Shahrokh & Mezei, József, 2013. "Evaluation of mobile services and substantial adoption factors with Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 915-929.
    4. Ming-Tsang Lu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Hilary Cheng & Chih-Cheng Hsu, 2015. "Exploring mobile banking services for user behavior in intention adoption: using new hybrid MADM model," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 9(3), pages 541-565, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Cui, Li & Chan, Hing Kai & Zhou, Yizhuo & Dai, Jing & Lim, Jia Jia, 2019. "Exploring critical factors of green business failure based on Grey-Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 450-461.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Heng-Li Yang & Shiang-Lin Lin, 2017. "The evaluation factors of adopting SoLoMo services: the hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 11(3), pages 601-629, September.
    2. Tsai, Pei-Hsuan & Kao, Ya-Ling & Kuo, Szu-Yu, 2023. "Exploring the critical factors influencing the outlying island talent recruitment and selection evaluation model: Empirical evidence from Penghu, Taiwan," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Chih-Jou Chen & Ho-Chin Yang, 2021. "Using Porter’s Diamond Model to Assess the Competitiveness of Taiwan’s Solar Photovoltaic Industry," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    4. Tsai, Pei-Hsuan, 2020. "Strategic evaluation criteria to assess competitiveness of the service industry in Taiwan," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1287-1309.
    5. Juin-Hao Ho & Gwo-Guang Lee & Ming-Tsang Lu, 2020. "Exploring the Implementation of a Legal AI Bot for Sustainable Development in Legal Advisory Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-17, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Bo-Wei Zhu & Jia-Rui Zhang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Shan-Lin Huang & Lei Xiong, 2017. "Public Open Space Development for Elderly People by Using the DANP-V Model to Establish Continuous Improvement Strategies towards a Sustainable and Healthy Aging Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-29, March.
    8. Shih-Chia Chang & Hsu-Hwa Chang & Ming-Tsang Lu, 2021. "Evaluating Industry 4.0 Technology Application in SMEs: Using a Hybrid MCDM Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Nastaran Chitsaz & Mohammad Banihabib, 2015. "Comparison of Different Multi Criteria Decision-Making Models in Prioritizing Flood Management Alternatives," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(8), pages 2503-2525, June.
    10. Tsai, Pei-Hsuan & Chen, Chih-Jou, 2021. "Entertainment in retailing: Challenges and opportunities in the TV game console industry," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    11. Barak, Sasan & Dahooei, Jalil Heidary, 2018. "A novel hybrid fuzzy DEA-Fuzzy MADM method for airlines safety evaluation," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 134-149.
    12. Shih-Chia Chang & Ming-Tsang Lu & Mei-Jen Chen & Li-Hua Huang, 2021. "Evaluating the Application of CSR in the High-Tech Industry during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(15), pages 1-16, July.
    13. Chui-Hua Liu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Po-Yen Lee, 2019. "Combined CFPR and VIKOR Model for Enhancing the Competencies of Domestic Chain Hotel Groups," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(03), pages 901-927, May.
    14. Yupeng Liu & Yutao Yang & Yue Liu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2019. "Improving Sustainable Mobile Health Care Promotion: A Novel Hybrid MCDM Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-29, January.
    15. F. M. Jumaah & A. A. Zaidan & B. B. Zaidan & R. Bahbibi & M. Y. Qahtan & A. Sali, 2018. "Technique for order performance by similarity to ideal solution for solving complex situations in multi-criteria optimization of the tracking channels of GPS baseband telecommunication receivers," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 425-443, July.
    16. Heidary Dahooie, Jalil & Qorbani, Ali Reza & Daim, Tugrul, 2021. "Providing a framework for selecting the appropriate method of technology acquisition considering uncertainty in hierarchical group decision-making: Case Study: Interactive television technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Kuan-Wei Huang & Jen-Hung Huang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2016. "New Hybrid Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Model for Improving Competence Sets: Enhancing a Company’s Core Competitiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, February.
    18. Yongming Song & Jun Hu, 2017. "Vector similarity measures of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their applications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    20. Hae-Yeol Kang & Seung Taek Chae & Eun-Sung Chung, 2023. "Quantifying Medium-Sized City Flood Vulnerability Due to Climate Change Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques: Case of Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-20, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0217786. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.