AHP AND DEA: AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO EVALUATING ONLINE REVIEWS
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9907-8347
Abstract
-
The use of the Internet and its applications has radically transformed the ways in which consumers communicate, obtain information and make purchasing decisions. This work aims to identify innovative solutions to facilitate and make the process of searching and booking restaurant services by users who use digital platforms more efficient. The main objective is to analyze the intrinsic complexity of the user’s decision-making process, highlighting the main critical issues and difficulties with perception and possible information distortions, in order to design a support tool capable of offering a highly personalized and high-quality choice experience. The contribution proposes an advanced decision-making model that integrates the use of two multi-criteria methodologies: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). These tools make it possible to simultaneously consider a multiplicity of qualitative and quantitative criteria, configuring an evaluation much more adherent to the real preferences of users. The combined adoption of these two approaches constitutes a methodological innovation capable of providing each user with a dynamic, personalized and efficient search path, significantly improving the quality of decisions and the level of perceived satisfaction. This model, which overcomes the limitations of traditional recommendation systems based on simple averages is proposed as a reference tool for the design of online platforms dedicated to catering, with potential extensions to other service sectors.
How to Cite
Downloads
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
AHP, DEA, EFFICIENCY, MCDM, customer satisfaction
Ar, I. M., & Kurtaran, A. (2013). Evaluating the relative efficiency of commercial banks in Turkey: An integrated AHP/DEA approach. International Business Research, 6(4), 129. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v6n4p129
Arunyanart, S. (2024). Performance evaluation of facility locations using integrated DEA-based techniques. Heliyon, 10(11), e32430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32430
Baziyad, H., Kayvanfar, V., & Toloo, M. (2024). A data envelopment analysis model for opinion leaders’ identification in social networks. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 190, 110010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2024.110010
Brunelli, M., & Cavallo, B. (2020). Incoherence measures and relations between coherence conditions for pairwise comparisons. Decisions in Economics and Finance, 43, 613-635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10203-020-00291-x
Brunelli, M., & Cavallo, B. (2020). Distance-based measures of incoherence for pairwise comparisons. Knowledge-Based Systems, 187, 104808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2019.06.016
Cavallo, B., & D'Apuzzo, L. (2009). A general unified framework for pairwise comparison matrices in multicriterial methods. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 24(4), 377-398. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20329
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., Seiford, L. M., Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Seiford, L. M. (1994). Basic DEA models. In Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., Seiford, L. M., Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., ... & Seiford, L. M. (Eds.) Data envelopment analysis: Theory, methodology, and applications (pp. 23-47) SpringerLink. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0637-5_2
Crouch, G. I., & Brent Ritchie, J. R. (1997, October). Convention site selection research: A review, conceptual model, and propositional framework. Journal of Convention & Exhibition Management, 1(1), 49-69). https://doi.org/10.1300/j143v01n01_05
D’Apuzzo, L., Marcarelli, G., & Squillante, M. (2009). Analysis of qualitative and quantitative rankings in multicriteria decision making. In Faggini, M., Lux, T. (Eds.) Coping with the Complexity of Economics. New Economic Windows. Milano: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1083-3_10
Farrel, M. J. (1957). The measure of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 120, 28.
Feng, Y. J., Lu, H., & Bi, K. (2004). An AHP/DEA method for measurement of the efficiency of R&D management activities in universities. International Transactions in Operational Research, 11(2), 181-191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3995.2004.00450.x
Forman, E., & Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 165-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(97)00244-0
Foroughi, A., & Esfahani, M. (2012). A robust AHP-DEA method for measuring the relative efficiency: An application of airport industry. Management Science Letters, 2(1), 93-100. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2011.09.018
Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019). On the methodological framework of composite indices: A review of the issues of weighting, aggregation, and robustness. Social Indicators Research, 141, 61-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9
Hong, Y., & Qu, S. (2024). Beyond boundaries: The AHP-DEA model for holistic cross-banking operational risk assessment. Mathematics, 12(7), 968. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12070968
Ishizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336-14345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143
Ishizaka, A., & Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-criteria decision analysis: methods and software. John Wiley & Sons.
Liu, X., Li, M. Y., Ma, Y. M., Gao, T. H., & Yuan, D. N. (2024). Personalized tourism product design focused on tourist expectations and online reviews: An integrated MCDM method. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 188, 109860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2023.109860
Lin, M. I., Lee, Y. D., & Ho, T. N. (2011). Applying integrated DEA/AHP to evaluate the economic performance of local governments in China. European Journal of Operational Research, 209(2), 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2010.08.006
Liu, W. B., Meng, W., Li, X. X., & Zhang, D. Q. (2010). DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs. Annals of Operations Research, 173, 177-194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-009-0587-3
Mahapatra, B., Mukherjee, K., & Bhar, C. (2015). Performance measurement–an DEA-AHP based approach. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 3(1), 26-30. https://doi.org/10.12720/joams.3.1.26-30
Mardani, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Streimikiene, D., Jusoh, A., & Khoshnoudi, M. (2017). A comprehensive review of data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach in energy efficiency. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 70, 1298-1322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.030
Moriarty, R. T., & Bateson, J. E. (1982). Exploring complex decision making units: A new approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(2), 182-191. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378201900202
Pakkar, M. S. (2015). An integrated approach based on DEA and AHP. Computational Management Science, 12, 153-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10287-014-0207-9
Pokushko, M., Stupina, A., Medina-Bulo, I., Stupin, A., Stasiuk, V., & Pokushko, R. (2025). The Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes model and its appliation. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mathematics and Informatics, 40(1), 197-207. https://doi.org/10.22190/fumi240306015p
Ramanathan, R. (2006). Data envelopment analysis for weight derivation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process. Computers and Operations Research, 33(5), 1289-1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2004.09.020.
Saaty, Thomas. 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
Saaty, T. L. (1987). Concepts, theory and techniques: rank generation, preservation, and reversal in the analytic hierachy decision process. Decision Sciences, 18(2), 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1987.tb01514.x
Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European Journal of Operational Research, 145(1), 85-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(02)00227-8
Sahoo, S. K., & Goswami, S. S. (2023). A comprehensive review of multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) Methods: advancements, applications, and future directions. Decision Making Advances, 1(1), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.31181/dma1120237
Shirouyehzad, H., Lotfi, F. H., Arabzad, S. M., & Dabestani, R. (2013). An AHP/DEA ranking method based on service quality approach: a case study in hotel industry. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 11(4), 434-445. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpqm.2013.054269
Sinuany‐Stern, Z., Mehrez, A., & Hadad, Y. (2000). An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units. International Ttransactions in Operational Research, 7(2), 109-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-3995.2000.tb00189.x
Su, Y. (2024). Influence of entrepreneur social network on new product development performance of enterprises under intelligent big data. International Journal of High Speed Electronics and Systems, 34(3), 2540012. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0129156425400129
Sueyoshi, T., Shang, J., & Chiang, W. C. (2009). A decision support framework for internal audit prioritization in a rental car company: A combined use between DEA and AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 199(1), 219-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.11.010.
Tavana, M., Bonyani, A., & Karimi, T. (2025). A full ranking method in data envelopment analysis with multi-criteria decision analysis. International Journal of Applied Management Science, 17(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijams.2025.143653
Tone, K. (2001). A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(3), 498-509. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(99)00407-5
Vincova, K. (2005). Using DEA models to measure efficiency. Biatec, 13(8), 24-28.
Wang, Y. M., Liu, J., & Elhag, T. M. (2008). An integrated AHP–DEA methodology for bridge risk assessment. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54(3), 513-525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.09.002
Yang, T., & Kuo, C. (2003). A hierarchical AHP/DEA methodology for the facilities layout design problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 128-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(02)00251-5
Yu, G., Wei, Q., & Brockett, P. (1996). Chapter 2 A generalized data envelopment analysis model: A unification and extension of existing methods for efficiency analysis of decision making units. Annals of Operations Research, 66, 47-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02125452
Copyright of all articles published in IJAHP is transferred to Creative Decisions Foundation (CDF). However, the author(s) reserve the following:
- All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
- The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain permission from CDF as well. However, CDF may grant rights with respect to journal issues as a whole.
- The right to use all or parts of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, textbooks, or reprint books.
- The authors affirm that the article has been neither copyrighted nor published, that it is not being submitted for publication elsewhere, and that if the work is officially sponsored, it has been released for open publication.
The only exception to the statements in the paragraph above is the following: If an article published in IJAHP contains copyrighted material, such as a teaching case, as an appendix, then the copyright (and all commercial rights) of such material remains with the original copyright holder.
CDF will receive permission for publication of copyrighted material in IJAHP. This permission is not transferable to third parties. Permission to make electronic and paper copies of part or all of the articles, including all computer files that are linked to the articles, for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage.
This permission does not apply to previously copyrighted material, such as teaching cases. In paper copies of the article, the copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date should be visible. To copy otherwise is permitted provided that a per-copy fee is paid.
To republish, to post on servers, or redistribute to lists requires that you post a link to the IJAHP article, which is available in open access delivery mode. Do not upload the article itself.
Authors are permitted to present a talk, based on a paper submitted to or accepted by IJAHP, at a conference where the paper would not be published in a copyrighted publication either before or after the conference and where the author did not assign copyright to the conference or related publisher.