评估 DEMATEL 和 WINGS 中相互依存属性排序的突出度和总参与度指标

IF 6.7 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
{"title":"评估 DEMATEL 和 WINGS 中相互依存属性排序的突出度和总参与度指标","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.omega.2024.103176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A weight vector is assigned to the attributes in multiple-attribute decision-making to show their relative importance. The interdependencies among the attributes often influence this weight vector. The decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) and weighted influence non-linear gauge system (WINGS) are among those methods that consider these interdependencies. These methods require matrix manipulation with several metrics to evaluate interdependencies. This study investigates the potential irregularities within the metrics employed by these two methods for weighing criteria. It examines these metrics and analyzes their sensitivity to the direction and the level of influence among attributes. We provide several numerical examples and mathematical analyses to evaluate their consistency by comparing the expected outcomes with the outcomes of the metrics. Although the metrics are expected to assign higher importance to the more influencing criteria, the total engagement/prominence metric is not sensitive to the direction and level of influence among attributes. We conclude these metrics are inconsistent and can not be used reliably as a composite indicator. In contrast, we show that the total impact factor reflects both the direction and the level of influence and is a reliable choice for this purpose.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19529,"journal":{"name":"Omega-international Journal of Management Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An assessment of the prominence and total engagement metrics for ranking interdependent attributes in DEMATEL and WINGS\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.omega.2024.103176\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A weight vector is assigned to the attributes in multiple-attribute decision-making to show their relative importance. The interdependencies among the attributes often influence this weight vector. The decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) and weighted influence non-linear gauge system (WINGS) are among those methods that consider these interdependencies. These methods require matrix manipulation with several metrics to evaluate interdependencies. This study investigates the potential irregularities within the metrics employed by these two methods for weighing criteria. It examines these metrics and analyzes their sensitivity to the direction and the level of influence among attributes. We provide several numerical examples and mathematical analyses to evaluate their consistency by comparing the expected outcomes with the outcomes of the metrics. Although the metrics are expected to assign higher importance to the more influencing criteria, the total engagement/prominence metric is not sensitive to the direction and level of influence among attributes. We conclude these metrics are inconsistent and can not be used reliably as a composite indicator. In contrast, we show that the total impact factor reflects both the direction and the level of influence and is a reliable choice for this purpose.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Omega-international Journal of Management Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Omega-international Journal of Management Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048324001415\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omega-international Journal of Management Science","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048324001415","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在多属性决策中,会给属性分配一个权重向量,以显示它们的相对重要性。属性之间的相互依存关系往往会影响权重向量。决策试验和评估实验室 (DEMATEL) 和加权影响非线性测量系统 (WINGS) 是考虑这些相互依存关系的方法之一。这些方法需要矩阵操作和多个指标来评估相互依存关系。本研究调查了这两种方法在权衡标准时所采用的指标中可能存在的不规则性。本研究考察了这些指标,并分析了它们对属性之间的影响方向和影响程度的敏感性。我们提供了几个数字示例和数学分析,通过比较预期结果和度量结果来评估它们的一致性。虽然这些度量标准预计会赋予影响较大的标准更高的重要性,但总参与度/主导度量标准对各属性之间的影响方向和影响程度并不敏感。我们的结论是,这些指标不一致,不能可靠地用作综合指标。相比之下,我们发现总影响因子既能反映影响的方向,也能反映影响的程度,因此是一个可靠的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An assessment of the prominence and total engagement metrics for ranking interdependent attributes in DEMATEL and WINGS

A weight vector is assigned to the attributes in multiple-attribute decision-making to show their relative importance. The interdependencies among the attributes often influence this weight vector. The decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) and weighted influence non-linear gauge system (WINGS) are among those methods that consider these interdependencies. These methods require matrix manipulation with several metrics to evaluate interdependencies. This study investigates the potential irregularities within the metrics employed by these two methods for weighing criteria. It examines these metrics and analyzes their sensitivity to the direction and the level of influence among attributes. We provide several numerical examples and mathematical analyses to evaluate their consistency by comparing the expected outcomes with the outcomes of the metrics. Although the metrics are expected to assign higher importance to the more influencing criteria, the total engagement/prominence metric is not sensitive to the direction and level of influence among attributes. We conclude these metrics are inconsistent and can not be used reliably as a composite indicator. In contrast, we show that the total impact factor reflects both the direction and the level of influence and is a reliable choice for this purpose.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Omega-international Journal of Management Science
Omega-international Journal of Management Science 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
11.60%
发文量
130
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: Omega reports on developments in management, including the latest research results and applications. Original contributions and review articles describe the state of the art in specific fields or functions of management, while there are shorter critical assessments of particular management techniques. Other features of the journal are the "Memoranda" section for short communications and "Feedback", a correspondence column. Omega is both stimulating reading and an important source for practising managers, specialists in management services, operational research workers and management scientists, management consultants, academics, students and research personnel throughout the world. The material published is of high quality and relevance, written in a manner which makes it accessible to all of this wide-ranging readership. Preference will be given to papers with implications to the practice of management. Submissions of purely theoretical papers are discouraged. The review of material for publication in the journal reflects this aim.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信