IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i10p1806-d429139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hybrid TODIM Method for Law Enforcement Possibility Evaluation of Judgment Debtor

Author

Listed:
  • Zhenyu Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    School of Automation, Nanjing University of Science & Technology, Nanjing 210094, China
    Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design Institute (Group) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Jie Lin

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Huirong Zhang

    (School of Labor Relationship, Shandong Management University, Jinan 250357, China)

  • Shuangsheng Wu

    (School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Dapei Jiang

    (SF Airlines Co., Ltd., Shenzhen 518128, China)

Abstract

The phenomenon of the judgment debtor evading the execution of legal documents and concealing his property by improper means has become increasingly prominent in China, which seriously affects the realization of the people’s legitimate rights and interests. To protect the legitimate rights and interests of the people, it is necessary to study the law enforcement possibility evaluation of judgment debtors and quickly judge which judgment debtor is likely to complete the legal documents. A novel hybrid TODIM (an acronym in Portuguese for Interative Multi-criteria Decision Making) method for evaluating the law enforcement possibility of judgment debtors is developed. The main idea of the hybrid TODIM method is to obtain the relative possibility value of judgment debtors by comparing the attribute values between two judgment debtors and aggregating all the attributes’ differences. The result shows that the hybrid TODIM method fully considers the psychological and behavioral factors of the law enforcement officers in the evaluation process. The evaluation result is more in line with the law enforcement officers’ experience in handling execution cases. Compared with the hybrid TOPSIS (technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution) method, the hybrid TODIM method is more suitable for solving the problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhenyu Zhang & Jie Lin & Huirong Zhang & Shuangsheng Wu & Dapei Jiang, 2020. "Hybrid TODIM Method for Law Enforcement Possibility Evaluation of Judgment Debtor," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:10:p:1806-:d:429139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/10/1806/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/10/1806/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1984. "Prométhée: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9305, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Qin, Jindong & Liu, Xinwang & Pedrycz, Witold, 2017. "An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 626-638.
    3. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(3), pages 337-369, September.
    4. Wenkai Zhang & Yanbing Ju & Xiaoyue Liu & Mihalis Giannakis, 2017. "A mathematical programming-based method for heterogeneous multicriteria group decision analysis with aspirations and incomplete preference information," Post-Print hal-01617972, HAL.
    5. J. H. P. Paelinck, 1976. "Qualitative Multiple Criteria Analysis, Environmental Protection And Multiregional Development," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 59-76, January.
    6. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(4), pages 309-309.
    7. Luiz Gomes & Maria Machado & Luis Rangel, 2013. "Behavioral multi-criteria decision analysis: the TODIM method with criteria interactions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 531-548, December.
    8. Paelinck, J. H. P., 1978. "Qualiflex: A flexible multiple-criteria method," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 193-197.
    9. J Paelinck, 1977. "Qualitative Multicriteria Analysis: An Application to Airport Location," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 9(8), pages 883-895, August.
    10. Autran Monteiro Gomes, Luiz Flávio & Duncan Rangel, LuI´s Alberto, 2009. "An application of the TODIM method to the multicriteria rental evaluation of residential properties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 204-211, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pingping Cao & Jin Zheng & Mingyang Li, 2023. "Product Selection Considering Multiple Consumers’ Expectations and Online Reviews: A Method Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Soft Sets and TODIM," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-20, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiaoli Tian & Zeshui Xu & Xinxin Wang & Jing Gu & Fawaz E. Alsaadi, 2019. "Decision Models to Find a Promising Start-Up Firm with Qualiflex under Probabilistic Linguistic Circumstance," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(04), pages 1379-1402, July.
    2. Juan-juan Peng & Jian-qiang Wang & Wu-E Yang, 2017. "A multi-valued neutrosophic qualitative flexible approach based on likelihood for multi-criteria decision-making problems," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 425-435, January.
    3. Llamazares, Bonifacio, 2018. "An analysis of the generalized TODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(3), pages 1041-1049.
    4. Chao Tian & Wen Yu Zhang & Shuai Zhang & Juan Juan Peng, 2019. "An Extended Single-Valued Neutrosophic Projection-Based Qualitative Flexible Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Xiaoyue Liu & Dawei Ju, 2021. "Hesitant Fuzzy 2-Dimension Linguistic Programming Technique for Multidimensional Analysis of Preference for Multicriteria Group Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(24), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Pu Ji & Hong-yu Zhang & Jian-qiang Wang, 2017. "Fuzzy decision-making framework for treatment selection based on the combined QUALIFLEX–TODIM method," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(14), pages 3072-3086, October.
    7. Zhang-peng Tian & Jing Wang & Jian-qiang Wang & Hong-yu Zhang, 2017. "Simplified Neutrosophic Linguistic Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Approach to Green Product Development," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 597-627, May.
    8. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    9. Mousseau, Vincent & Dias, Luis, 2004. "Valued outranking relations in ELECTRE providing manageable disaggregation procedures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 467-482, July.
    10. Xiaolu Zhang, 2016. "New Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Behavioral MADM Method and Its Application in the Selection of Photovoltaic Cells," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, October.
    11. Yuan-Sheng Lee & Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "Incremental analysis for generalized TODIM," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(4), pages 901-922, December.
    12. Renaud Caillet, 2003. "Analyse multicritère : Étude de comparaison des méthodes existantes en vue d'une application en analyse de cycle de vie," CIRANO Working Papers 2003s-53, CIRANO.
    13. Kellner, Florian & Lienland, Bernhard & Utz, Sebastian, 2019. "An a posteriori decision support methodology for solving the multi-criteria supplier selection problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 505-522.
    14. Yang, Chih-Hao & Lee, Kuen-Chang, 2020. "Developing a strategy map for forensic accounting with fraud risk management: An integrated balanced scorecard-based decision model," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    15. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.
    16. Amin Mahmoudi & Xiaopeng Deng & Saad Ahmed Javed & Na Zhang, 2021. "Sustainable Supplier Selection in Megaprojects: Grey Ordinal Priority Approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 318-339, January.
    17. Huchang Liao & Xiaomei Mi & Zeshui Xu, 2020. "A survey of decision-making methods with probabilistic linguistic information: bibliometrics, preliminaries, methodologies, applications and future directions," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 81-134, March.
    18. Askoura, Youcef & Billot, Antoine, 2021. "Social decision for a measure society," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    19. Ehud Kalai & Roger B. Myerson, 1977. "Values of Games Without Sidepayments," Discussion Papers 267, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    20. Jeffrey T. Macher & John W. Mayo & Olga Ukhaneva & Glenn A. Woroch, 2017. "From universal service to universal connectivity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 77-104, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:10:p:1806-:d:429139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.