Ordering vs. AHP. Does the intensity used in the decision support techniques compensate?
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemEditorial
Elsevier
Materia
AHP IBR Decision support system Expertise Intensity Judgment
Fecha
2023-10-02Referencia bibliográfica
C. Sáenz-Royo et al. Ordering vs. AHP. Does the intensity used in the decision support techniques compensate?. Expert Systems With Applications 238 (2024) 121922 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121922]
Patrocinador
Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, [ECO2017-86305-C4-3-R]; Diputación General de Arag´on (DGA) and the European Social Fund [CREVALOR]; CUD (UZCUD2017-SOC-04); Spanish State Research Agency under Project PID2019-103880RB-I00/AEI/https://doi.org/10.13039/501, 100,011,033 and PID2020-113338RB-I00Resumen
The manifestation of the intensity in the judgment of one alternative versus another in the peer comparison
processes is a central element in some decision support techniques, such as the Analytical Hierarchy Process
(AHP). However, its contribution regarding quality (expected performance) with respect to the priority vector
has not been evaluated so far. Using the Intentional Bounded Rationality Methodology (IBRM), this work analyzes
the gains obtained from requiring the decision-maker to report an intensity judgment in pairs (AHP) with
respect to a technique that only requires expressing a preference (Ordering). The results show that when
decision-makers have low levels of expertise, it is possible that a less informative and computational cheap
technique (Ordering) performs better than a more informative and computational expensive one (AHP). When
decision-makers have medium and high levels of expertise, AHP technique obtains modest gains with respect to
the Ordering technique. This study proposes a cost-benefit analysis of decision support techniques contrasting the
gains of a technique that requires more resources (AHP) against other that require less resources (Ordering). Our
results can change the managing approach of the information obtained from experts’ judgments.