A group nonadditive multiattribute consumer-oriented Kansei evaluation model with an application to traditional crafts

Annals of Operations Research

Volumn 195, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 325-354

  Yan, Hong Bin ^a   Huynh, Van Nam ^b   Nakamori, Yoshiteru ^b  

^a EAST CHINA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (China)

^b JAPAN ADVANCED INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Hand painted Kutani cups; Kansei data; Nonadditive multiattribute Kansei evaluation; Semantic overlapping; Target oriented Kansei evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858702869     PISSN: 02545330     EISSN: 15729338     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10479-010-0826-7     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bordley, R., & Kirkwood, C. (2004). Multiattribute preference analysis with performance targets. Operations Research, 52(6), 823-835.
2. Bordley, R., & LiCalzi, M. (2000). Decision analysis using targets instead of utility functions. Decisions in Economics and Finance, 23(1), 53-74.
3. Chen, C. C., & Chuang, M. C. (2008). Integrating the Kano model into a robust design approach to enhance customer satisfaction with product design. International Journal of Production Economics, 114(2), 667-681.
4. Chen, H. Y., & Chang, Y. M. (2009). Extraction of product form features critical to determining consumers perceptions of product image using a numerical definition-based systematic approach. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(1), 133-145.
5. Grimsæth, K. (2005). Kansei engineering: linking emotions and product features. Tech. rep., Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norwegian.
6. Herrera, F., & Martínez, L. (2000). A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 8(6), 746-752.
7. Hsu, S. H., Chuang, M. C., & Chang, C. C. (2000). A semantic differential study of designers' and users' product form perception. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 25(4), 375-391.
8. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
9. Kojadinovic, I. (2008). Unsupervized aggregation of commensurate correlated attributes by means of the Choquet integral and entropy functionals. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 23(2), 128-154.
10. Lai, H. H., Lin, Y. C., Yeh, C. H., & Wei, C. H. (2006). User-oriented design for the optimal combination on product design. International Journal of Production Economics, 100(2), 253-267.
11. Lawry, J. (2004). A framework for linguistic modelling. Artificial intelligence, 155(1-2), 1-39.
12. Lawry, J. (2008). Appropriateness measures: an uncertainty model for vague concepts. Synthese, 161(2), 255-269.
13. Llinares, C., & Page, A. (2007). Application of product differential semantics to quantify purchaser perceptions in housing assessment. Building and Environment, 42(7), 2488-2497.
14. Marichal, J. L. (2000). An axiomatic approach of the discrete Choquet integral as a tool to aggregate interacting criteria. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 8(6), 800-807.
15. Martínez, L. (2007). Sensory evaluation based on linguistic decision analysis. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 44(2), 148-164.
16. Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97.
17. Mon, D. L., Cheng, C. H., & Lin, J. C. (1994). Evaluating weapon system using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process based on entropy weight. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 62(2), 127-134.
18. Mondragón, S., Company, P., & Vergara, M. (2005). Semantic differential applied to the evaluation of machine tool design. International Journal of Production Economics, 35(11), 1021-1029.
19. Nagamachi, M. (2002). Kansei engineering as a powerful consumer-oriented technology for product development. Applied Ergonomics, 33(3), 289-294.
20. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
21. Petiot, J. F., & Yannou, B. (2004). Measuring consumer perceptions for a better comprehension, specification and assessment of product semantics. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 33(6), 507-525.
22. Petit-Renaud, S., & Denœux, T. (2004). Nonparametric regression analysis of uncertain and imprecise data using belief functions. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 35(1), 1-28.
23. Postrel, Virginia (2001). Can good looks really guarantee a product's success? The New York Times.
24. Ruan, D., & Zeng, X. (Eds.) (2004). Intelligent sensory evaluations: methodologies and applications. Berlin: Springer.
25. Shannon, C. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379-423.
26. Tsetlin, I., & Winkler, R. (2007). Decision making with multiattribute performance targets: the impact of changes in performance and target distributions. Operations Research, 55(2), 226-233.
27. Yadav, O. P., & Goel, P. S. (2008). Customer satisfaction driven quality improvement target planning for product development in automotive industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 113(2), 997-1011.
28. Yan, H. B., Huynh, V. N., & Nakamori, Y. (2009). Decision analysis with hybrid uncertain performance targets. In Proc. IEEE int. conf. SMC 2009 (pp. 4360-4365).
29. Zadeh, L. A. (1975). The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-Part I. Information Sciences, 8(3), 199-249.