How to treat strict preference information in multicriteria decision analysis

Park, Kyung Sam; Jeong, Il-Kwon

doi:10.1057/jors.2010.155

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our conservative choice of this lower limit of 25% for the number of original rankings per journal is in line with previous related studies, such as Cook et al [12] and Theuβl et al [33]. 12 A particular problem in attaching weights to the individual journal ranks in our DEA exercise is the arbitrary choice of a rank discrimination threshold to separate the weights of any two consecutive ranks (see [62,64,65,67]). If the threshold is virtually '0', this leads to the undesirable suggestion that there may be no difference between any pair of journal ranks.…”

Section: Rating and Ranking Journals By Deasupporting

confidence: 54%

Towards a Consolidation of Worldwide Journal Rankings A Classification Using Random Forests and Aggregate Rating via Data Envelopment Analysis

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of how to assess research outputs published in journals is now a global concern for academics. Numerous journal ratings and rankings exist, some featuring perceptual and peer-reviewbased journal ranks, some focusing on objective information related to citations, some using a combination of the two. This research consolidates existing journal rankings into an up-to-date and comprehensive list. Existing approaches to determining journal rankings are significantly advanced with the application of a new classification approach, 'random forests', and data envelopment analysis. As a result, a fresh look at a publication's place in the global research community is offered. While our approach is applicable to all management and business journals, we specifically exemplify the relative position of 'operations research, management science, production and operations management' journals within the broader management field, as well as within their own subject domain.

show abstract

Section: Rating and Ranking Journals By Deasupporting

confidence: 54%

Towards a Consolidation of Worldwide Journal Rankings A Classification Using Random Forests and Aggregate Rating via Data Envelopment Analysis

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With regard to (i),  several alternative functions have received attention in the literature -e.g.others. Regarding (ii), the problem of choosing has long been  acknowledged in the extant literature(Cook and Kress 1990, Green et al 1996, Llamazares and Peña 2009, Park and Jeong 2011, Llamazares and Peña 2013. To address this issue,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection

Pishchulov

Trautrims

Chesney

et al. 2019

International Journal of Production Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Civil society increasingly holds focal companies accountable for ensuring socially and environmentally sustainable production standards among their supply base. These standards entail increased levels of complexity to be addressed by appropriately designed tools, such as the Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process (VAHP) proposed by Liu and Hai (2005). This method of multi-criteria group decision making structures decision criteria in a hierarchical fashion as per Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and employs data envelopment analysis (DEA) for deriving criteria weights from the ordinal preferences of the group members. Compared to AHP, the method permits a simpler application in a group decision context. However, its theoretical underpinnings have been questioned in the literature. This specifically concerns (i) the requirement of a strong convex order for the importance weights of ordinal rank gradations, and (ii) the choice of discrimination threshold for consecutive rank weights in the underlying DEA model. We propose a revised VAHP method that overcomes both issues (i) and (ii) by pursuing a game-theoretic approach to elicitation of criteria weights-so as to remove subjectivity from rank discrimination. We illustrate the application of the method on a real-world problem of sustainable supplier selection. We contribute to theory by proposing a more robust VAHP tool that helps supply chain and purchasing managers selecting suppliers based on a comprehensive set of criteria spanning all three sustainability dimensions (economic, environmental, and social), while coping with parsimonious input by group decisionmakers.

show abstract

A safe sequential screening technique for solving multi-attribute choice problems under ranked weights

Souissi

Hnich

2022

Comp. Appl. Math.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How to treat strict preference information in multicriteria decision analysis

Cited by 8 publications

References 27 publications

Towards a Consolidation of Worldwide Journal Rankings A Classification Using Random Forests and Aggregate Rating via Data Envelopment Analysis

Towards a Consolidation of Worldwide Journal Rankings A Classification Using Random Forests and Aggregate Rating via Data Envelopment Analysis

The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection

A safe sequential screening technique for solving multi-attribute choice problems under ranked weights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About