PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2019 | 23 | nr 2 | 1--14
Tytuł artykułu

The Impact of Decision-Making Profiles on the Consistency of Rankings Obtained by Means of Selected Multiple Criteria Decision-Aiding Methods

Warianty tytułu
Wpływ profilu decyzyjnego na zgodność rankingów otrzymanych za pomocą wybranych metod wielokryterialnych - analiza badania eksperymentalnego
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
W pracy podjęto problematykę wpływu profilu decyzyjnego na zgodność pomiędzy subiektywnymi preferencjami decydenta a rankingami otrzymanymi za pomocą trzech metod wielokryterialnych, tj. DR, AHP, TOPSIS. Do badania wykorzystano kwestionariusz ankiety elektronicznej będącej hybrydą klasycznego internetowego systemu sondażowego i systemu wspomagania decyzji. Uczestnikami eksperymentu było 418 studentów polskich uczelni. Do opisu profilu decyzyjnego zastosowano test REI, który umożliwił wyodrębnienie dwóch stylów decyzyjnych: racjonalnego oraz intuicyjnego. Do badania zgodności rankingów otrzymanych wybranymi metodami zastosowano współczynnik korelacji rang Kendalla. Stosując różne metody grupowania, starano się znaleźć związki między profilem decyzyjnym a umiejętnością wyrażania swoich preferencji za pomocą metod różniących się wymaganiami poznawczymi. Wyniki badań mogą być pomocne w wyborze metody wsparcia decydenta przy wspomaganiu decyzji z uwzględnieniem profilu decyzyjnego.(abstrakt oryginalny)
EN
The paper discusses the impact of the decision-making profiles on the consistency of rankings obtained by three multiple criteria methods, i.e. DR, AHP and TOPSIS. The online decision making experiment was organized, based on an electronic questionnaire which is a hybrid of the internet survey system and the decision support system. The participants of the experiment were 418 students of Polish universities. To describe the decision-making profile, the REI test was used which allows to distinguish two decision-making styles: rational and intuitive. The Kendall rank correlation coefficient was used to test the consistency of the rankings obtained by the considered methods. Using different grouping methods, the relationship between the decision profile and the ability to express one's preferences by means of these methods, that differ in cognitive requirements, was examined. The results of the research may be helpful for supporting the decision-maker in decision processes by choosing the method that fits their profile best.(original abstract)
Rocznik
Tom
23
Numer
Strony
1--14
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
  • University of Bialystok, Poland
  • University of Economics in Katowice, Poland
Bibliografia
  • Allinson C.W., Hayes J., 1996, The cognitive style index: a measure of intuition-analysis for organizational research, Journal of Management Studies, 33, pp. 119-135.
  • Edwards W., Barron F.H., 1994, SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement, Organ Behav Hum Dec, vol. 60(3), pp. 306-325.
  • Epstein S., Pacini R., Denes-Raj V., Heier H., 1996, Individual differences in intuitive experiential and analytical - rational thinking styles, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, pp. 390-405.
  • Evans J.St.B.T., Stanovich K.E. 2013, Dual-process theories of higher cognition: advancing the debate, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, pp. 223-241.
  • Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M. (eds.), 2016, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, Springer, New York.
  • Gershon M., 1981, Model Choice in Multi-Objective Decision-Making in Natural Resource Systems, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona.
  • Górecka D., 2011, On the choice of method in multi criteria decision aiding process concerning European projects, Multiple Criteria Decision Making (6), pp. 81-103.
  • Guitouni A., Martel J.M., 1998, Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method, European Journal of Operational Research, no. 109, pp. 501-521.
  • Hajkowicz S., Higgins A., 2008, A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management, European Journal of Operational Research, 184(1), pp. 255-265.
  • Hobbs B.F., 1986, What can we learn from experiments in multi-objective decision analysis?, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 16(3), pp. 384-394.
  • Hwang C.-L., Yoon K., 1981, Multiple Attribute Decision-Making: Methods and Applications, Springer- Verlag, New York.
  • Ishizaka A., Sajid S., 2018, Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods, European Journal of Operational Research 264, pp. 462-471.
  • Kahneman D., 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Macmillan, New York. Kahneman D., Tversky D., 1984, Choices, values and frames, American Psychologist 39, pp. 341-350.
  • MacCrimmon K.R., 1973, An Overview of Multiple Objective Decision-Making, [in:] Cochran J.L., Zeleny M. (eds), Multiple Criteria Decision-Making, University of South Carolina Press (Columbia), pp. 18-44.
  • Mela K., Tiainen T., Markku H., 2012, Comparative study of multiple criteria decision-making methods for building design, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 26(4), pp. 716-726.
  • Ozernoy V.M., 1987, A Framework for Choosing the Most Appropriate Discrete Alternative Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Method in Decision Support Systems and Expert Systems, Toward Interactive and Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Springer, pp. 56-64.
  • Roszkowska E., Filipowicz-Chomko M., Wachowicz T., 2018, Assessment of acceptability of selected multicriteria methods - an experimental study, Research Papers of Wrocław University of Economics, 507, pp. 219-226.
  • Roszkowska E., Wachowicz T., 2014a, Defining Preferences and Reference Points - a Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Experiment, [in:] Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Group Decision and Negotiation. A Process-Oriented View, P. Zaraté, G.E. Kersten, J.E. Hernández (eds.), Springer, pp. 136-143.
  • Roszkowska E., Wachowicz T., 2014b, SAW-Based Rankings vs. Intrinsic Evaluations of the Negotiation Offers - an Experimental Study, [in:] Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Group Decision and Negotiation. A Process-Oriented View, eds P. Zaraté, G.E. Kersten, J.E. Hernández, Springer, pp. 176-183.
  • Roszkowska E., Wachowicz T., 2016, Analyzing the applicability of selected MCDA methods for determining the reliable scoring systems, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Group Decision and Negotiation Bellingham, D.S. Bajwa, S. Koeszegi, R. Vetschera (eds), Western Washington University, pp. 180-187.
  • Roszkowska E., Wachowicz T. (eds.), 2016, Negocjacje. Analiza i wspomaganie decyzji, Wolters Kluwer Polska.
  • Roy B., 1990, Wielokryterialne wspomaganie decyzji, Wydawnictwa Naukowo-Techniczne, Warszawa.
  • Saaty T.L., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw Hill, New York.
  • Saaty T.I., Ergu D., 2015, When is a decision-making method trustworthy? Criteria for evaluating multi-criteria decision-making methods, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision- Making Vol. 14, pp. 1171-1187.
  • Stanovich K.E., West R.F., 2000, Advancing the rationality debate, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, pp. 701-717.
  • Tecle A., 1988, Choice of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques for Watershed Management, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona.
  • Triantaphyllou E., Mann S.H., 1989, An examination of the effectiveness of multidimensional decision -making methods: A decision-making paradox, Decision Support System, 5(3), pp. 303-312.
  • Trzaskalik T. (ed.), 2014, Wielokryterialne wspomaganie decyzji. Metody i zastosowania, PWE, Warszawa.
  • Triantaphyllou E., 2000, Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: a Comparative Study, Springer, US.
  • Wand Y., Highhouse S., Lake C., Petersen N.L., Rada N.L., 2017, Meta-analytic investigations of the relation between intuition and analysis, Journal of Behavioral Decision-Making, J. Behav. Dec. Making, 30, pp. 15-25.
  • Zanakis S.H., Solomon A., Wishart N., Dublish S., 1998, Multi-attribute decision-making: a simulation comparison of select methods, European Journal of Operational Research, 107(3), pp. 507-529.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171557970

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.