Literature DB >> 33746337

How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy.

Marco Cinelli1, Miłosz Kadziński1, Michael Gonzalez2, Roman Słowiński1,3.   

Abstract

Decision making is a complex task that involves a multitude of perspectives, constraints, and variables. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is a process that has been used for several decades to support decision making. It includes a series of steps that systematically help Decision Maker(s) (DM(s)) and stakeholders in structuring a decision making problem, identifying their preferences, and building a decision recommendation consistent with those preferences. Over the last decades, many studies have demonstrated the conduct of the MCDA process and how to select an MCDA method. Until now, there has not been a review of these studies, nor a proposal of a unified and comprehensive high-level representation of the MCDA process characteristics (i.e., features), which is the goal of this paper. We introduce a review of the research that defines how to conduct the MCDA process, compares MCDA methods, and presents Decision Support Systems (DSSs) to recommend a relevant MCDA method or a subset of methods. We then synthesize this research into a taxonomy of characteristics of the MCDA process, grouped into three main phases, (i) problem formulation, (ii) construction of the decision recommendation, and (iii) qualitative features and technical support. Each of these phases includes a subset of the 10 characteristics that helps the analyst implementing the MCDA process, while also being aware of the implication of these choices at each step. By showing how decision making can be split into manageable and justifiable steps, we reduce the risk of overwhelming the analyst, as well as the DMs/stakeholders during the MCDA process. A questioning strategy is also proposed to demonstrate how to apply the taxonomy to map MCDA methods and select the most relevant one(s) using real case studies. Additionally, we show how the DSSs for MCDA method recommendation can be grouped into three main clusters. This proposal can enhance a traceable and categorizable development of such systems.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision making; Decision support system; MCDA; Method recommendation; Multiple criteria; Taxonomy

Year:  2020        PMID: 33746337      PMCID: PMC7970504          DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2020.102261

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Omega        ISSN: 0305-0483            Impact factor:   7.084


  13 in total

1.  Using multicriteria methods in environmental planning and management.

Authors:  R Lahdelma; P Salminen; J Hokkanen
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 2.  Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections.

Authors:  Mandy Ryan; Karen Gerard
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.561

3.  The robust beauty of ordinary information.

Authors:  Konstantinos V Katsikopoulos; Lael J Schooler; Ralph Hertwig
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis.

Authors:  Gilberto Montibeller; Detlof von Winterfeldt
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 4.000

5.  Multiple criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment.

Authors:  Praveen Thokala; Alejandra Duenas
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012-10-06       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  Aggregating sustainability indicators: beyond the weighted sum.

Authors:  Hazel V Rowley; Gregory M Peters; Sven Lundie; Stephen J Moore
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 6.789

7.  Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications.

Authors:  Dayton Marchese; Erin Reynolds; Matthew E Bates; Heather Morgan; Susan Spierre Clark; Igor Linkov
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 7.963

8.  MCDA swing weighting and discrete choice experiments for elicitation of patient benefit-risk preferences: a critical assessment.

Authors:  Tommi Tervonen; Heather Gelhorn; Sumitra Sri Bhashyam; Jiat-Ling Poon; Katharine S Gries; Anne Rentz; Kevin Marsh
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 2.890

9.  Benefits and risks of emerging technologies: integrating life cycle assessment and decision analysis to assess lumber treatment alternatives.

Authors:  Michael P Tsang; Matthew E Bates; Marcus Madison; Igor Linkov
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 10.  Advancing Alternative Analysis: Integration of Decision Science.

Authors:  Timothy F Malloy; Virginia M Zaunbrecher; Christina M Batteate; Ann Blake; William F Carroll; Charles J Corbett; Steffen Foss Hansen; Robert J Lempert; Igor Linkov; Roger McFadden; Kelly D Moran; Elsa Olivetti; Nancy K Ostrom; Michelle Romero; Julie M Schoenung; Thomas P Seager; Peter Sinsheimer; Kristina A Thayer
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 9.031

View more
  4 in total

1.  MCDA Index Tool: an interactive software to develop indices and rankings.

Authors:  Marco Cinelli; Matteo Spada; Wansub Kim; Yiwen Zhang; Peter Burgherr
Journal:  Environ Syst Decis       Date:  2020-07-16

2.  Supporting contaminated sites management with Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: Demonstration of a regulation-consistent approach.

Authors:  Marco Cinelli; Michael A Gonzalez; Robert Ford; John McKernan; Salvatore Corrente; Miłosz Kadziński; Roman Słowiński
Journal:  J Clean Prod       Date:  2021-09-20       Impact factor: 11.072

3.  A Rapid Literature Review of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods in the Context of One Health for All-Hazards Threat Prioritization.

Authors:  Jiawei Zhao; Tiffany Smith; Melissa Lavigne; Cécile Aenishaenslin; Ruth Cox; Aamir Fazil; Ana Johnson; Javier Sanchez; Benoit Hermant
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-04-15

4.  Similarity of TOPSIS results based on criterion variability: Case study on public economic.

Authors:  Roman Vavrek; Jiří Bečica
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 3.752

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.