IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods

  • Zanakis, Stelios H.
  • Solomon, Anthony
  • Wishart, Nicole
  • Dublish, Sandipa
Registered author(s):

    No abstract is available for this item.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VCT-3TC6THR-1/2/361b4a418d05d38a4adde4694f8c0add
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal European Journal of Operational Research.

    Volume (Year): 107 (1998)
    Issue (Month): 3 (June)
    Pages: 507-529

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:107:y:1998:i:3:p:507-529
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Kok, M. & Lootsma, F. A., 1985. "Pairwise-comparison methods in multiple objective programming, with applications in a long-term energy-planning model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 44-55, October.
    2. Lockett, Geoff & Stratford, Mike, 1987. "Ranking of research projects: Experiments with two methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 395-400.
    3. James S. Dyer, 1990. "A Clarification of "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 274-275, March.
    4. William G. Stillwell & Detlof von Winterfeldt & Richard S. John, 1987. "Comparing Hierarchical and Nonhierarchical Weighting Methods for Eliciting Multiattribute Value Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 442-450, April.
    5. Kok, Matthijs, 1986. "The interface with decision makers and some experimental results in interactive multiple objective programming methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 96-107, July.
    6. Gemunden, Hans Georg & Hauschildt, Jurgen, 1985. "Number of alternatives and efficiency in different types of top-management decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 178-190, November.
    7. Thomas L. Saaty, 1990. "An Exposition of the AHP in Reply to the Paper "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 259-268, March.
    8. James S. Dyer, 1990. "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 249-258, March.
    9. Imran S. Currim & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1984. "A Comparative Evaluation of Multiattribute Consumer Preference Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 543-561, May.
    10. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.
    11. Zahedi, Fatemeh, 1986. "A simulation study of estimation methods in the analytic hierarchy process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 347-354.
    12. Stewart, TJ, 1992. "A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 569-586.
    13. Paul J. H. Schoemaker & C. Carter Waid, 1982. "An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 182-196, February.
    14. Roy, B. & Bouyssou, D., 1986. "Comparison of two decision-aid models applied to a nuclear power plant siting example," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 200-215, May.
    15. Buchanan, J. T. & Daellenbach, H. G., 1987. "A comparative evaluation of interactive solution methods for multiple objective decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 353-359, June.
    16. Takeda, E. & Cogger, K. O. & Yu, P. L., 1987. "Estimating criterion weights using eigenvectors: A comparative study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 360-369, June.
    17. James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Jyrki Wallenius & Stanley Zionts, 1992. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: The Next Ten Years," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 645-654, May.
    18. Belton, Valerie, 1986. "A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute value function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 7-21, July.
    19. Saaty, Thomas L & Vargas, Luis G, 1984. "The legitimacy of rank reversal," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 513-516.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:107:y:1998:i:3:p:507-529. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.