IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wut/journl/v33y2023i3p89-104id6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teaching assistant selection in Thailand by using an extended VIKOR based on piecewise linear approximation of fuzzy numbers

Author

Listed:
  • Akan Narabin
  • Phairoj Samutrak

Abstract

Because of the COVID-19 situation, selection for a teaching assistant position to get a TA scholarship in a university in Thailand needs to be performed online by the formed committee. Due to the online process and the limited number of scholarships offered by the university, beyond the face-to-face interview, multiple-criteria decision analysis can help to select a proper student. In this study, we use the extended VIKOR method with fuzzy numbers to help committees to select the students from the applicants. The criteria and the weights of the criteria are provided with the help of committees. Both trapezoidal and triangular linguistic variables are used to find the solution and to observe the range of the possible result. The different weights supporting the strategy of maximum group utility are varied to detect the potential alternatives. The ranking results are also compared with the one obtained from the TODIM approach to illustrate the appropriate alternative.

Suggested Citation

  • Akan Narabin & Phairoj Samutrak, 2023. "Teaching assistant selection in Thailand by using an extended VIKOR based on piecewise linear approximation of fuzzy numbers," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(3), pages 89-104.
    • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:33:y:2023:i:3:p:89-104:id:6
    DOI: 10.37190/ord230306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ord.pwr.edu.pl/assets/papers_archive/ord2023vol33no3_6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.37190/ord230306?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. Llamazares, Bonifacio, 2018. "An analysis of the generalized TODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(3), pages 1041-1049.
    2. Hamed Taherdoost, 2017. "Decision Making Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); A Step by Step Approach," Post-Print hal-02557320, HAL.
    3. 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.
    4. Irina Canco & Drita Kruja & Tiberiu Iancu, 2021. "AHP, a Reliable Method for Quality Decision Making: A Case Study in Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-14, December.
    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. Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione & Francesco Amato & Santolo Cozzolino & Giuseppe Russo & Maria Romano & Giovanni Improta, 2022. "A Hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process and Likert Scale Approach for the Quality Assessment of Medical Education Programs," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, April.
    2. Nina Almasifar & Tülay Özdemir Canbolat & Milad Akhavan & Roberto Alonso González-Lezcano, 2021. "Proposing a New Methodology for Monument Conservation “SCOPE MANAGEMENT” by the Use of an Analytic Hierarchy Process Project Management Institute System and the ICOMOS Burra Charter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Sueun Jung & Jihyun Lee, 2023. "Exploring a Conceptual Framework of Koreans’ Residential Satisfaction Based on Maslow’s Human Needs: A Qualitative and Quantitative Integrated Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-40, September.
    4. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    5. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Lim, Chulmin & Rowsell, Joe & Kim, Seongcheol, 2023. "Exploring the killer domains to create new value: A Comparative case study of Canadian and Korean telcos," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 277998, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    8. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Rubio-Aliaga, Alvaro & García-Cascales, M. Socorro & Sánchez-Lozano, Juan Miguel & Molina-Garcia, Angel, 2021. "MCDM-based multidimensional approach for selection of optimal groundwater pumping systems: Design and case example," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 213-224.
    10. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    11. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    12. Jing Xu & Ren Zhang & Yangjun Wang & Hengqian Yan & Quanhong Liu & Yutong Guo & Yongcun Ren, 2022. "A New Framework for Assessment of Offshore Wind Farm Location," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-17, September.
    13. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    14. Shiyao Zhu & Dezhi Li & Haibo Feng & Tiantian Gu & Jiawei Zhu, 2019. "AHP-TOPSIS-Based Evaluation of the Relative Performance of Multiple Neighborhood Renewal Projects: A Case Study in Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Asma Fahim & Qingmei Tan & Bushra Naz & Qurat ul Ain & Sibghat Ullah Bazai, 2021. "Sustainable Higher Education Reform Quality Assessment Using SWOT Analysis with Integration of AHP and Entropy Models: A Case Study of Morocco," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Jingya Qiao & Mo Wang & Dongqing Zhang & Chenyang Ding & Jingjing Wang & Dawei Xu, 2017. "Synergetic Development Assessment of Urban River System Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-15, November.
    17. Baffoe, Gideon, 2019. "Exploring the utility of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in ranking livelihood activities for effective and sustainable rural development interventions in developing countries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 197-204.
    18. Lucas, Rochelle Irene & Promentilla, Michael Angelo & Ubando, Aristotle & Tan, Raymond Girard & Aviso, Kathleen & Yu, Krista Danielle, 2017. "An AHP-based evaluation method for teacher training workshop on information and communication technology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 93-100.
    19. Reed, Brinton & Chan-Halbrendt, Catherine & Tamang, B.B. & Chaudhary, Narendra, 2014. "Analysis of conservation agriculture preferences for researchers, extension agents, and tribal farmers in Nepal using Analytic Hierarchy Process," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 90-96.
    20. J Aznar & J Ferrís-Oñate & F Guijarro, 2010. "An ANP framework for property pricing combining quantitative and qualitative attributes," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(5), pages 740-755, May.

    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:wut:journl:v:33:y:2023:i:3:p:89-104:id:6. 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: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iopwrpl.html .

    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.