2002
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4615-1495-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis

Abstract: be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, Of transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
789
0
63

Year Published

2004
2004
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,074 publications
(1,044 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
789
0
63
Order By: Relevance
“…Techniques: In our review, 34.3 % of the studies used discourse analysis, 27.1 % used Likert-type scales [a measure of the level of agreement or disagreement to a statement according to a symmetric scale; e.g., 1-5, 0-3, 0-10 (Likert 1932)], 22.9 % used ranking or weighting [including AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) (Saaty 1980) and swingweighting], 8.6 % used Multi-Criteria Decision Aid [MCDA (Belton and Stewart 2001)], 5.7 % used community mapping, and 1.4 % used outcomes from a workshop or focus group (Fig. 4b).…”
Section: Stagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Techniques: In our review, 34.3 % of the studies used discourse analysis, 27.1 % used Likert-type scales [a measure of the level of agreement or disagreement to a statement according to a symmetric scale; e.g., 1-5, 0-3, 0-10 (Likert 1932)], 22.9 % used ranking or weighting [including AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) (Saaty 1980) and swingweighting], 8.6 % used Multi-Criteria Decision Aid [MCDA (Belton and Stewart 2001)], 5.7 % used community mapping, and 1.4 % used outcomes from a workshop or focus group (Fig. 4b).…”
Section: Stagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other methods for deriving part-worth utilities are outlined by Belton and Stewart (2002). In the present context, participants are asked repeatedly to choose between a pair of hypothetical sheep flocks with respect to which flock is more preferred.…”
Section: Survey Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One approach suggests splitting the MCA model and creating a specific single-assessment model for each scenario. In this approach, different weights are subsequently assigned to the evaluation criteria under each scenario [130,131]. Schroeder and Lambert [132] used a similar approach in which weights of the evaluation criteria were altered.…”
Section: Building the Hierarchymentioning
confidence: 99%