Abstract
In unconventional emergency decision making process using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), it is important to quickly collect and process experts’ opinions to make a rapid decision. Questionnaire survey is a commonly used way to collect opinions and views in the AHP. However, many factors such as tedious design format, redundant content, and long length, may lead to inconsistent comparison matrix for the decision problem. Invalid or bad results of a questionnaire survey may cause the decision makers to make wrong decision. Furthermore, in the AHP, the score items for a comparison matrix in a questionnaire increase drastically if there are more comparisons, which result in longer survey. In this paper, a scale format is used to design the score items for a comparison matrix in questionnaire survey. Besides, an induced bias matrix model (IBMM) is proposed to estimate the missing item scores of the reciprocal pairwise comparison matrix. The survey questionnaire can be improved according to the importance of score items and emergency degree of the surveyed questions. A numerical example is used to illustrate the proposed method in unconventional emergency decision making. In addition, three cases of this example are analyzed and compared to address the effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed estimation model in the survey questionnaire design.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altay, N., & Green, W. G. III (2006). OR/MS research in disaster operations management. European Journal of Operational Research, 175(1), 475–493.
Barzilai, J. (1997). Deriving weights from pairwise comparison matrices. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48, 1226–1232.
Bryson, N. (1995). A goal programming method for generating priority vectors. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46, 641–648.
Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Alonso, S. (2009). A note on two methods for estimating missing pairwise preference values. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics,Part B: Cybernetics, 39, 1628–1633.
Chu, A., Kalaba, R., & Springam, K. (1979). A comparison of two methods for determining the weights of belonging to fuzzy sets. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 27, 531–541.
Crawford, G., & Williams, C. (1985). A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 29, 387–405.
Ergu, D., Kou, G., Peng, Y., & Shi, Y. (2011a). A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP. European Journal of Operational Research, 213(1), 246–259. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2011.03.014.
Ergu, D., Kou, G., Shi, Y., & Shi, Y. (2011b). Analytic network process in risk assessment and decision analysis. Computers & Operations Research. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2011.03.005.
Ergu, D., Kou, G., Peng, Y., Shi, Y., & Shi, Y. (2011c). The analytic hierarchy process: task scheduling and resource allocation in cloud computing environment. Journal of Supercomputing. doi:10.1007/s11227-011-0625-1.
Fedrizzi, M., & Giove, S. (2007). Incomplete pairwise comparison and consistency optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(1), 303–313.
Hu, Z. H. (2010). Multi-signal cooperative decision for emergency management inspired by immune system. Journal of Computers, 5(9), 1410–1416.
Kou, G., & Lou, C. (2010). Multiple factor hierarchical clustering algorithm for large scale Web page and search engine clickstream data. Annals of Operation Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-010-0704-3.
Kou, G., Liu, X., Peng, Y., Shi, Y., Wise, M., & Xu, W. (2003). Multiple criteria linear programming to data mining: models, algorithm designs and software developments. Optimization Methods & Software, 18(4), 453–473, Part 2.
Kou, G., Peng, Y., Chen, Z., & Shi, Y. (2009). Multiple criteria mathematical programming for multi-class classification and application in network intrusion detection. Information Sciences, 179(4), 371–381.
Li, L. F., & Tang, S. M. (2008). An artificial emergency-logistics-planning system for severe disasters. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 23(4), 86–88.
Lim, K. H., & Swenseth, S. R. (1993). An iterative procedure for reducing problem size in large scale AHP problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 67, 64–74.
Mendonça, D., Beroggi, G. E. G., & Wallace, W. A. (2001). Decision support for improvisation during emergency response operations. International Journal of Emergency Management, 1(1), 30–40.
Millet, I., & Harker, P. T. (1990). Globally effective questioning in the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 88–97.
Özdamar, L., Ekinci, E., & Küçükyazici, B. (2004). Emergency logistics planning in natural disasters. Annals of Operation Research, 129, 217–245.
Pelaez, J. I., & Lamata, M. T. (2003). A new measure of consistency for positive reciprocal matrices. Computers & Mathematics With Applications, 46(12), 1839–1845.
Peng, Y., Kou, G., Shi, Y., & Chen, Z. (2008). A descriptive framework for the field of data mining and knowledge discovery. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 7(4), 639–682.
Peng, Y., Wang, G., & Wang, H. (2010a). User preferences based software defect detection algorithms selection using MCDM. Information Sciences. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.04.019.
Peng, Y., Zhang, Y., Tang, Y., & Li, S. (2010b). An incident information management framework based on data integration, data mining, and multi-criteria decision making. Decision Support Systems. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2010.11.025.
Peng, Y., Kou, G., Wang, G., Wu, W., & Shi, Y. (2011a). Ensemble of software defect predictors: an AHP-based evaluation method. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 10(1), 187–206.
Peng, Y., Wang, G., Kou, G., & Shi, Y. (2011b). An empirical performance metric for classification algorithm selection in financial risk management. Applied Soft Computing, 11(2), 2906–2915.
Peng, Y., Kou, G., Wang, G., & Shi, Y. (2011c). FAMCDM: a fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms. OMEGA. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2011.01.009.
Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234–281.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytical hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Saaty, T. L. (1994). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces, 24, 19–43.
Saaty, T. L. (2001). Deriving the AHP 1–9 scale from first principles. In ISAHP 2001 proceedings, Bern, Switzerland.
Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-making with the AHP: why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European Journal of Operational Research, 145(1), 85–89.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors the analytic hierarchy/network process. Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matematicas, 102(2), 251–318. doi:10.1007/BF03191825.
Tufekci, S., & Wallace, W. A. (1998). The emerging area of emergency management and engineering. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(2), 103–105.
Yan, S. Y., & Shih, Y. L. (2009). Optimal scheduling of emergency roadway repair and subsequent relief distribution. Computers & Operations Research, 36(9), 2049–2065.
Yi, W., & Ozdamar, L. (2007). A dynamic logistics coordination model for evacuation and support in disaster response activities. European Journal of Operational Research, 179(3), 1177–1193.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ergu, D., Kou, G. Questionnaire design improvement and missing item scores estimation for rapid and efficient decision making. Ann Oper Res 197, 5–23 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-0922-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-0922-3