IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitdm/v18y2019i06ns021962201950041x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique

Author

Listed:
  • Roman Vavrek

    (Department of Informatics, Technical University of Liberec, Voronežská 1329/13, 460 01 Liberec, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The present research deals with selected multi-criteria methods identified according to available literature sources as a suitable instrument for the comprehensive evaluation of a set of alternatives. Further, it focuses on a group of methods including Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), which is often associated in practice with the use of several subjective and objective methods for the determination of the weights of selected indicators. Accordingly, five of these objective methods are used in this research. The main contribution consists in emphasizing the differences between the results achieved through various methods for the determination of the weights of input indicators. Moreover, we restate the fact that the choice of an adequate method to weigh indicators significantly affects the overall results of the TOPSIS technique. The Coefficient of Variance method clearly identifies subjects in prominent positions. Subsequently, the Mean Weight method does not consider the structure of data and their variability, while focusing on all the indicators being equal. The results obtained via the Standard Deviation and the Statistical Variance Procedure methods are comparable with the results obtained for the identical weights of individual indicators, i.e., the Mean Weight method. Therefore, based on the overall results of our research for the determination of the weights of input indicators for the purposes of the TOPSIS technique, we recommend the use of the Standard Deviation method.

Suggested Citation

  • Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitdm:v:18:y:2019:i:06:n:s021962201950041x
    DOI: 10.1142/S021962201950041X
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S021962201950041X
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S021962201950041X?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. Gang Kou & Chunwei Lou, 2012. "Multiple factor hierarchical clustering algorithm for large scale web page and search engine clickstream data," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 123-134, August.
    2. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans, 1994. "PROMCALC & GAIA: a new decision support system for multicriteria decision aid," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9349, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Abbas Mardani & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Kannan Govindan & Aslan Amat Senin & Ahmad Jusoh, 2016. "VIKOR Technique: A Systematic Review of the State of the Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-38, January.
    4. Gang Kou & Yanqun Lu & Yi Peng & Yong Shi, 2012. "Evaluation Of Classification Algorithms Using Mcdm And Rank Correlation," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 197-225.
    5. Jie Yin & Xiaoyan Yang & Xiangmin Zheng & Niantao Jiao, 2017. "Analysis of the investment security of the accommodation industry for countries along the B&R," Tourism Economics, , vol. 23(7), pages 1437-1450, November.
    6. Shirley Jie Xuan Wang & Kim Leng Poh, 2017. "Intelligent Decision Support in Proportional–Stop-Loss Reinsurance Using Multiple Attribute Decision-Making (MADM)," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, November.
    7. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Estimating the weights for multiple attributes in a composite criterion using pairwise judgments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(4), pages 473-493, December.
    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. Pekka Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius & Stanley Zionts, 1984. "Solving the Discrete Multiple Criteria Problem using Convex Cones," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(11), pages 1336-1345, November.
    10. Kou, Gang & Lin, Changsheng, 2014. "A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 225-232.
    11. Domingos Cardoso & Jorge Sousa, 2005. "A Multi-Attribute Ranking Solutions Confirmation Procedure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 127-141, September.
    12. Joshi, Deepa & Kumar, Sanjay, 2016. "Interval-valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy Choquet integral based TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(1), pages 183-191.
    13. Yu-Ping Ou Yang & How-Ming Shieh & Jun-Der Leu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2009. "A Vikor-Based Multiple Criteria Decision Method For Improving Information Security Risk," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(02), pages 267-287.
    14. Saaty, Thomas L., 1978. "Modeling unstructured decision problems — the theory of analytical hierarchies," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 147-158.
    15. Bertrand Mareschal & Gilles D'Avignon, 1989. "Specialization of hospital services in Québec: an application of the PROMETHEE and GAIA methods," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9325, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Yi Peng & Gang Kou & Yong Shi & Zhengxin Chen, 2008. "A Descriptive Framework For The Field Of Data Mining And Knowledge Discovery," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(04), pages 639-682.
    20. Roubens, Marc, 1982. "Preference relations on actions and criteria in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 51-55, May.
    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. Feng, Cheng-Min & Wang, Rong-Tsu, 2000. "Performance evaluation for airlines including the consideration of financial ratios," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 133-142.
    23. Robert T. Eckenrode, 1965. "Weighting Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 180-192, November.
    24. Olson, David L. & Venkataramanan, Munirpallam & Mote, John L., 1986. "A technique using analytical hierarchy process in multiobjective planning models," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 361-368.
    25. 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.
    26. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    27. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Chen, Ting-Yu & Wang, Jih-Chang, 1998. "A weight-assessing method with habitual domains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 342-367, October.
    28. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    29. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Abbas Mardani & Zenonas Turskis & Ahmad Jusoh & Khalil MD Nor, 2016. "Development of TOPSIS Method to Solve Complicated Decision-Making Problems — An Overview on Developments from 2000 to 2015," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 645-682, May.
    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. Roman Vavrek & Jiří Bečica, 2020. "Efficiency Evaluation of Cultural Services in the Czech Republic via Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Ahmed Mohammed & Morteza Yazdani & Amar Oukil & Ernesto D. R. Santibanez Gonzalez, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach towards Resilient Sourcing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-30, March.
    3. Zhao, Huiru & Li, Bingkang & Lu, Hao & Wang, Xuejie & Li, Hongze & Guo, Sen & Xue, Wanlei & Wang, Yuwei, 2022. "Economy-environment-energy performance evaluation of CCHP microgrid system: A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    4. Renan Felinto de Farias Aires & Camila Cristina Rodrigues Salgado, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria Approach to Assess the Performance of the Brazilian Unified Health System," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-13, September.
    5. Abraham Londoño-Pineda & Jose Alejandro Cano & Rodrigo Gómez-Montoya, 2021. "Application of AHP for the Weighting of Sustainable Development Indicators at the Subnational Level," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Kovářová Eva & Vavrek Roman, 2021. "The Occurrence of the Preconditions for Social Exclusion in the Czech Republic: A Basis for the Planning of Social Prevention Services," Review of Economic Perspectives, Sciendo, vol. 21(2), pages 173-188, June.
    7. Ryszard Pukala & Nadezda Kirillova & Alexey Dorozhkin, 2021. "Insurance Instruments in Estimating the Cost Energy Assets with Renewable Energy Sources," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, June.
    8. Nadezda Kirillova & Ryszard Pukala & Marietta Janowicz-Lomott, 2021. "Insurance Programs in the Renewable Energy Sources Projects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-12, October.
    9. Roman Vavrek & Jana Chovancová, 2020. "Energy Performance of the European Union Countries in Terms of Reaching the European Energy Union Objectives," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Roman Vavrek, 2021. "An Analysis of Usage of a Multi-Criteria Approach in an Athlete Evaluation: An Evidence of NHL Attackers," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, June.

    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. 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.
    2. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Syed Hammad Mian & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Strategic Outcome Using Fuzzy-AHP-Based Decision Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-22, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    5. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    6. Govindan, Kannan & Kadziński, Miłosz & Sivakumar, R., 2017. "Application of a novel PROMETHEE-based method for construction of a group compromise ranking to prioritization of green suppliers in food supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 129-145.
    7. Jie Wu & Liang Liang, 2012. "A multiple criteria ranking method based on game cross-evaluation approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 191-200, August.
    8. Yang, Chih-Hao & Lee, Kuen-Chang, 2020. "Developing a strategy map for forensic accounting with fraud risk management: An integrated balanced scorecard-based decision model," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    9. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.
    10. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.
    11. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.
    12. Manuel Casal-Guisande & Alberto Comesaña-Campos & Alejandro Pereira & José-Benito Bouza-Rodríguez & Jorge Cerqueiro-Pequeño, 2022. "A Decision-Making Methodology Based on Expert Systems Applied to Machining Tools Condition Monitoring," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, February.
    13. Wenshuai Wu & Yi Peng, 2016. "Extension of grey relational analysis for facilitating group consensus to oil spill emergency management," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 238(1), pages 615-635, March.
    14. Wenshuai Wu & Yi Peng, 2016. "Extension of grey relational analysis for facilitating group consensus to oil spill emergency management," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 238(1), pages 615-635, March.
    15. 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.
    16. Emre Çalişkan & Erdem Aksakal & Saliha Çetinyokuş & Tahsin Çetinyokuş, 2019. "Hybrid Use of Likert Scale-Based AHP and PROMETHEE Methods for Hazard Analysis and Consequence Modeling (HACM) Software Selection," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(05), pages 1689-1715, September.
    17. Rahimdel, Mohammad Javad & Noferesti, Hossein, 2020. "Investment preferences of Iran's mineral extraction sector with a focus on the productivity of the energy consumption, water and labor force," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    18. Roman Vavrek & Jiří Bečica, 2020. "Capital City as a Factor of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis—Application on Transport Companies in the Czech Republic," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    19. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    20. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.

    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:wsi:ijitdm:v:18:y:2019:i:06:n:s021962201950041x. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm/ijitdm.shtml .

    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.