Can all the methods people invented to do decision making be right all the time? Maybe for making trivial decisions, but not in the case of those that involve dependence and feedback and need complete analysis of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks to get an overall justifiable outcome.
Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP, Analytic Network Process (ANP), Methods of decision making
Social Sciences,17(3), 205-243.
Bana e Costa, C. A. and J.-C. Vansnick (1994). MACBETH—An interactive path
towards the construction of cardinal value functions. International Transactions in
Operational Research,1(4), 489-500.
Brans, J.-P. and B. Mareschal (2005). PROMETHEE methods. Multiple criteria decision
analysis: state of the art surveys. New York: Springer.
Brans, J.-P., P. Vincke, et al. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The
PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2), 228-238.
Buchanan, J. T. (1997). A naive approach for solving MCDM problems: The GUESS
method. Journal of the Operational Research Society,48(2), 202-206.
Cho, K. T. (2003). Multicriteria decision methods: an attempt to evaluate and unify.
Mathematical and computer modelling, 37(9), 1099-1119.
Churchman, C. W. and R. L. Ackoff (1954). An approximate measure of value.
Operations Research,2(2), 172-187.
Currim, I. S. and R. K. Sarin (1984). A comparative evaluation of multi-attribute
consumer preference models. Management Science,30(5), 543-561.
Deng, J.-L. (1989). Introduction to grey system theory. The Journal of Grey System, 1(1),
Filev, D. and R. R. Yager (1995). Analytic properties of maximum entropy OWA
operators. Information Sciences,85(1), 11-27.
Fishburn, P. C. (1967). Letter to the editor—Additive utilities with incomplete product
sets: Application to priorities and assignments. Operations Research,15(3), 537-542.
Gabus, A. and E. Fontela (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within
the framework of DEMATEL. Geneva, Switzerland: Battelle Geneva Research Center.
Geldermann, J. and A. Schöbel (2011). On the similarities of some Multi?Criteria
Decision Analysis Methods. Journal of Multi?Criteria Decision Analysis, 18(3-4), 219-
Greco, S., B. Matarazzo, et al. (1999). Rough approximation of a preference relation by
dominance relations. European Journal of Operational Research,117(1), 63-83.
Greco, S., B. Matarazzo, et al. (2002). Rough approximation by dominance relations.
International Journal of Intelligent Systems,17(2), 153-171.
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries.
ECTJ, 29(2), 75-91.
Guitouni, A. and J.-M. Martel (1998). Tentative guidelines to help choosing an
appropriate MCDA method. European Journal of Operational Research, 109(2), 501-
Hajkowicz, S. and A. Higgins (2008). A comparison of multiple criteria analysis
techniques for water resource management. European Journal of Operational
Hanne, T. (2001). Intelligent strategies for meta multiple criteria decision making.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hansen, P. and F. Ombler (2008). A new method for scoring additive multi?attribute
value models using pairwise rankings of alternatives. Journal of Multi?Criteria Decision
Hobbs, B. F. (1986). What can we learn from experiments in multiobjective decision
analysis?, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 16(3), 384-394.
Hobbs, B. F., V. Chankong, et al. (1992). Does choice of multicriteria method matter? An
experiment in water resources planning. Water Resources Research, 28(7), 1767-1779.
Humphreys, P. (1977). Application of multi-attribute utility theory. Decision making and
change in human affairs. New York: Springer.
Hwang, C.-L. and K. Yoon (1981). Multiple attribute decision making. New York:
Jacquet-Lagreze, E. and J. Siskos (1982). Assessing a set of additive utility functions for
multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method. European Journal of Operational
Research, 10(2), 151-164.
Karni, R., P. Sanchez, et al. (1990). A comparative study of multiattribute decision
making methodologies. Theory and Decision, 29(3), 203-222.
Keen, P. G. (1981). Value analysis: justifying decision support systems. MIS Quarterly,
Kou, G., Lu,Y.,Peng,Y.,and Shi, Y.(2012), Evaluation of classification algorithms using
MCDM and rank correlation. International Journal of Information Technology &
Decision Making, 11(1),197-225.
Kou, G. Ergu, D., Shang, J., (2013). Enhancing dataconsistency in decision matrix:
Adapting Hadamard Model to mitigate judgement contradiction, European Journal of
Operational Research, 236 (1), 261-271.
Kou, G.,Lin, C. (2014a). A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation
in AHP, European Journal, 235, 225–232.
Kou, G., Peng, Y., Wang, G., (2014 b). Evaluation of clustering algorithms for financial
risk analysis using MCDM methods, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1-12.
Khairullah, Z. Y. and S. Zionts (1980). An experiment with some algorithms for multiple
criteria decision making. In Fandel, G., Gal, T. (Eds), Multiple criteria decision making
theory and application, (150-159). Berlin: Springer.
Lee, S. M. (1972). Goal programming for decision analysis. Philadelphia: Auerbach.
LeShan, L. L. and H. Margenau (1982). Einstein's space and Van Gogh's sky: Physical
reality and beyond. New York: Macmillan.
Lowrance, J. D. and T. D. Garvey (1982). Evidential reasoning: A developing concept.
Proceedings on the International Conference of Cybernetics and Society, 6-9.
MacCrimmon, K. R. (1973). An overview of multiple objective decision making. In
Cochrane, J.L. and Zeleny M. (Eds), Multiple Criteria Decision Making (18-44).
Columbia, South Carolina: The University of South Carolina Press.
McCaffrey, J. D. (2009). Using the Multi-Attribute Global Inference of Quality
(MAGIQ) technique for software testing. Information Technology: New Generations,
2009. ITNG'09. Sixth International Conference.
Mudge, A. E. (1989). Value engineering: a systematic approach. Pittsburgh, PA: J. Pohl
Olson, D. L. (2001). Comparison of three multicriteria methods to predict known
outcomes. European Journal of Operational Research,130(3), 576-587.
Olson, D. L. (2004). Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models. Mathematical and
Computer Modelling, 40(7-8), 721-727.
Opricovi?, S. (1980). An extension of compromise programming to the solution of
dynamic multicriteria problem. In Iracki, K., Malanowski, K., Walukiewicz, S. (Eds),
Optimization Techniques, (508-517), Springer.
Opricovic, S. and G.-H. Tzeng (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A
comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational
Research, 156(2), 445-455.
Opricovic, S. and G.-H. Tzeng (2007). Extended VIKOR method in comparison with
outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514-529.
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. In Sawaragi, Y. (Ed), Toward interactive and intelligent decision Support
systems (56-64). Berlin: Springer.
Ozernoy, V. M. (1992). Choosing the “best” multiple criteria decision-making method.
INFOR, 30(2), 159-171.
Park, C. W. (1978). A conflict resolution choice model. Journal of Consumer Research, 5
Parker, D. E. (1985). Value engineering theory. Washington D.C.: Lawrence D Miles
Peniwati, K. (2007). Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods.
Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(7), 935-947.
Raiffa, H. and R. Keeney (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and
value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.
Roy, B. (1990). The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. In
C.A. Bana e Costa (Ed.) Readings in multiple criteria decision aid (155-183). Berlin:
Roy, B., R. Benayoun, et al. (1966). ELECTRE. Paris: Société d’Economie et de
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytical Hirarchical Process. New York: Wiley.
Saaty, T. L. (2004). Fundamentals of the analytic network process—Dependence and
feedback in decision-making with a single network. Journal of Systems Science and
Systems Engineering, 13(2), 129-157.
Saaty, T. L. (2005). The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the
measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. In Multiple criteria decision
analysis: State of the art surveys (345-405). New York: Springer.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making why
pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible
factors the Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process (to the memory of my beloved friend
Professor Sixto Rios Garcia). Revista De La Real Academia De Ciencias Exactas Fisicas
Y Naturales Serie a-Matematicas, 102(2), 251-318.
Saaty, T. L., & Ergu, D. (2015). When is a Decision Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria
for Evaluating Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods. 14.
Saaty, T. L. and N. Begicevic (2010). The scope of human values and human activities in
decision making. Applied Soft Computing, 10(4), 963-974.
Salminen, P., J. Hokkanen, et al. (1998). Comparing multicriteria methods in the context
of environmental problems. European Journal of Operational Research,104(3), 485-496.
Saltelli, A., M. Ratto, et al. (2008). Global sensitivity analysis: The primer. New York:
Saltelli, A., S. Tarantola, et al. (1999). A quantitative model-independent method for
global sensitivity analysis of model output. Technometrics, 41(1), 39-56.
Tam, C., T. K. Tong, et al. (2002). Non-structural fuzzy decision support system for
evaluation of construction safety management system. International Journal of Project
Management, 20(4), 303-313.
Tam, C., T. K. Tong, et al. (2006). Comparing non-structural fuzzy decision support
system and analytical hierarchy process in decision-making for construction problems.
European Journal of Operational Research,174(2), 1317-1324.
Tam, C., T. K. Tong, et al. (2002). Site layout planning using nonstructural fuzzy
decision support system. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128(3),
Triantaphyllou, E. and S. H. Mann (1989). An examination of the effectiveness of multidimensional
decision-making methods: A decision-making paradox. Decision Support
Systems, 5(3), 303-312.
Turskis, Z. and E. K. Zavadskas (2010). A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method
in multicriteria decision-making. Technological and Economic Development of
Von Winterfeldt, D. and W. Edwards (1986). Decision analysis and behavioral research.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wagner, H. M. (1995). Global sensitivity analysis. Operations Research,43(6), 948-969.
Xu, X. (2001). The SIR method: A superiority and inferiority ranking method for
multiple criteria decision making. European Journal of Operational Research,131(3),
Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in
multicriteria decisionmaking. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions 18(1),
Zanakis, S. H., A. Solomon, et al. (1998). Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation
comparison of select methods. European Journal of Operational Research,107(3), 507-
Zavadskas, E. and A. Kaklauskas (1996). Multicriteria evaluation of building (Pastat?
sistemotechninis ?vertinimas). Vilnius: Technika.
Zeleny, M. (1973). Compromise programming. In Cochrane J.L. and Zeleny M. (Eds),
Multiple Criteria Decision Making (262-301). Columbia, South Carolina: University of
South Carolina Press.
Zimmerman, L. W. and G. D. Hart (1982). Value engineering: A practical approach for
owners, designers, and contractors. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
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.