Browse > Article

Comparative Analysis of Multiattribute Decision Aids with Ordinal Preferences on Attribute Weights  

Ahn Byeong Seok (한성대학교 경영학부)
Publication Information
Abstract
In a situation that ordinal preferences on multiattribute weights are captured, we present two solution approaches: an exact approach and an approximate method. The former, an exact solution approach via interaction with a decision-maker, pursues the progressive reduction of a set of non-dominated alternatives by narrowing down the feasible attribute weights region. Subsequent interactive questions and responses, however, sometimes may not guarantee the best alternative or a complete rank order of a set of alternatives that the decision-maker desires to have. Approximate solution approaches, on the other hand, can be divided into three categories including surrogate weights methods, dominance value-based decision rules, and three classical decision rules. Their efficacies are evaluated in terms of choice accuracy via a simulation analysis. The simulation results indicate that a proposed hybrid approach, intended to combine an exact solution approach through interaction and a dominance value-based approach, is recommendable for aiding a decision making in a case that a final choice is seldom made at single step under attribute weights that are imprecisely specified beyond ordinal descriptions.
Keywords
Multiattribute Decision; Rank Order; Approximate Weights; Dominance Values;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Edwards, W. and F.H. Barron, 'Smarts and Smarter : improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement,' Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol.60(1994), pp.306- 325   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Fischer, G.W., 'Range sensitivity of attribute weights in multiattribte value models,' Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol.62(1995), pp.252-266   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Shoemaker, P.J.H. and C.D. Waid, 'An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models,' Management Science, Vol. 28(1982), pp.182-196   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Solymosi, T. and J. Dombi, 'A method for determining the weights of criteria: the centralized weights,' European Journal of Operational Research, VoI.26(1986), pp. 35-41   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Roy, B., 'The outranking approach and the foundation of ELECTRE methods,' Theory and Decision, Vol.31(1991), pp.4973
6 Butler, J. and D.L. Olson, 'Comparison of centroid and simulation approaches for selection sensitivity analysis,' Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Vol.8(1999), pp.146-161   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Barron, F.H. and BE. Barret, 'Decision quality using ranked attribute weights,' Management Science, Vol.42(1996), pp.1515-1523   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Kirkwood, C.W. and J.L. Corner, 'The effectiveness of partial information about attribute weights for ranking alternatives in multiattribute decision making,' Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol.54(1993), pp.456-476   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Puerto, J., A.M. Marmol, L. Monroy and F.R. Fernandez, 'Decision criteria with partial information,' International Transactions in Operational Research, Vol.7(2000), pp.51-65   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Weber, M., 'Decision making with incomplete information,' European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.28(1987), pp. 44-57   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Park, K.S. and S.H. Kim, 'Tools for interactive multiattribute decision making with incompletely identified information,' European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.98(1997), pp.111-123   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Winterfeldt D. von and W. Edwards, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge University Press, England, 1986
13 Marmol, A.M., J. Puerto and F.R. Fernandez, 'The use of partial information on weights in multicriteria decision problems,' Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Vol.7(1998), pp.322-329   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Keeney, R.L. and H. Raiffa, Decisions with Multiple Objectives : Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, Wiley, New York 1976
15 Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980
16 Stillwell, W.G., D.A. Seaver and W. Edwards, 'A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making,' Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol.28 (1981), pp.62-77
17 Jaccard, J., D. Brinberg and L.J. Ackerman, 'Assessing attribute importance : a comparison of six methods,' Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.12(1986), pp.463-468   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Kirkwood, CW. and RK. Sarin, 'Ranking with partial information : a method and an application,' Operations Research, Vol.33 (1985), pp.38-48   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Salo, A.A. and RP. Hamalainen, 'Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME)-elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information,' IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics -Part A, Vol. 31(2001), pp.533-545   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Jia, J., G.W. Fischer and J.S. Dyer, 'Attribute weighting method and decision quality in the presence of response error : a simulation study,' Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol.11(1998), pp.85-105   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Kahneman, D., P. Slovic and A. Tversky, Judgment Under Uncertainty : Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1982
22 Arbel, A., 'Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation,' European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.43 (1989), pp.317-326   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Kmietowcz, Z.W. and A.D. Pearman, 'Decision theory, linear partial information and statistical dominance,' Omega, Vol.12(1984), pp.391- 399   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Winkler, R.L. and W.L. Hays, Statistics : Probability, Inference, and Decision, New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985
25 Ahn, B.S., K.S. Park, C.H. Han and J.K. Kim, 'Multi-attribute decision aid under incomplete information and hierarchical structure,', European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.125(2000), pp.431-439   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Ahn, B.S., 'Extending Malakooti's model for ranking multi-criteria alternatives with preference strength and partial information,' IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A, Vol.33(2003), pp.281-287   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Brans, J.P. and Ph. Vincke, 'A preference ranking organization method,' Management Science, Vol.31(1985), pp.647-656   DOI   ScienceOn