Generating consensus priority interval vectors for group decision-making in the AHP

Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 127-137

  Bryson, Noel Kweku Muata ^a   Joseph, Anito ^b  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

AHP; Consensus; Goal programming; Group decision making; Imprecision; Prioritization; Priority vectors

Indexed keywords

EID: 0013398916     PISSN: 10579214     EISSN: 10991360     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/1099-1360(200007)9:4<127::AID-MCDA261>3.0.CO;2-2     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Aczel, J., Saaty, T., 1983. Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgements. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27: 93-102.
2. Arbel, A., 1990. A linear programming approach for processing approximate articulation of preference. In Multiple Criteria Decision Support, Korhonen P, Lewandowski A, Wallenius J (eds); 81-86.
3. Bryson, N., Mobolurin, A., 1998. A qualitative discriminant approach for generating belief functions. IEEE Trans Knowledge and Data Engineering 10: 345-348.
4. Bryson, N., Mobolurin, Q., Ngwenyama, O., 1995. Modelling pairwise comparisons on ratio scales. European Journal of Operational Research 83: 639-654.
5. Bryson, N., 1996. Group decision-making and the analytic hierarchy process: exploring the consensus-relevant information content. Computers and Operations Research 23: 27-35.
6. Chard, T., 1994. Qualitative probability versus quantitative probability in clinical diagnosis. Medical Decision Making 11: 38-41.
7. Eiselt, H., Laporte, G., 1992. The use of domains in multi-criteria decision making. European Journal of Operational Research 61: 292-298.
8. Fichtner, J., 1986. On deriving priority vectors from matrices of pairwise comparisons. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 20(6): 399-405.
9. Forman, E., Peniwati, K., 1998. Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 108(1): 165-169.
10. Hamm, R., 1991. Selection of verbal probabilities: a solution for some problems of verbal probability expression. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes 48: 193-223.
11. Kirkwood, C., Sarin, R., 1985. Ranking with partial information: a method and an application. Operations Research 33: 38-48.
12. Mobolurin, A., Bryson, N., 1993. Aggregating preference rankings: an AHP based approach. Journal of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis 2: 27-39.
13. Nurmi, H., Kacprzyk, J., 1991. On fuzzy tournaments and their solution concepts in group decision making. European Journal of Operational Research 51: 223-232.
14. Ramanathan, R., Ganesh, L., 1994. Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: an evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members’ weightages. European Journal of Operational Research 79(2): 249-265.
15. Saaty, T., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. McGraw-Hill: New York.
16. Sniezek, J., Henry, R., 1989. Accuracy and confidence in group judgement. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making Processes 45: 66-84.
17. Sniezek, J., Henry, R., 1990. Revision, weighting, and commitment in consensus group judgement. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making Processes 45: 66-84.
18. Timmermanns, D., 1994. The roles of experience and domain of expertise in using numerical and verbal probability terms in medical decisions. Medical Decision Making 14: 146-156.
19. Van Den Honert, R., Lootsma, F., 1997. Group preference aggregation in the multiplicative AHP. European Journal of Operational Research 96(2): 363-370.
20. Weber, M., 1987. Decision making with incomplete information. European Journal of Operational Research 28: 44-57.
21. Wong, S., Lingras, P., 1994. Representative of qualitative user preference by qualitative belief functions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 6(1): 72-78.
22. Zahir, M., 1991. Incorporating the uncertainty of decision judgements in the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 53: 206-216.