An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP

被引:80
作者
Aull-Hyde, R
Erdogan, S
Duke, JM
机构
[1] Univ Delaware, Operat Res Program, Newark, DE 19716 USA
[2] Univ Maryland, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
[3] Univ Delaware, Dept Food & Resource Econ, Newark, DE 19716 USA
关键词
group decisions; analytic hierarchy process; simulation;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejor.2004.06.037
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
The analytic hierarchy process can be used for group decision making by aggregating individual judgments or individual priorities. The most commonly used aggregation methods are the geometric mean method and the weighted arithmetic mean method. While it is known that the weighted geometric mean comparison matrix is of acceptable consistency if all individual comparison matrices are of acceptable consistency, this paper addresses the following question: Under what conditions would an aggregated geometric mean comparison matrix be of acceptable consistency if some (or all) of the individual comparison matrices are not of acceptable consistency? Using Monte Carlo simulation, results indicate that given a sufficiently large group size, consistency of the aggregate comparison matrix is guaranteed, regardless of the consistency measures of the individual comparison matrices, if the geometric mean is used to aggregate. This result implies that consistency at the aggregate level is a non-issue in group decision making when group size exceeds a threshold value and the geometric mean is used to aggregate individual judgments. This paper determines threshold values for various dimensions of the aggregated comparison matrix. (c) 2004 Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:290 / 295
页数:6
相关论文
共 8 条
[1]   PROCEDURES FOR SYNTHESIZING RATIO JUDGEMENTS [J].
ACZEL, J ;
SAATY, TL .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1983, 27 (01) :93-102
[2]  
[Anonymous], EUR J OPER RES
[3]   Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process [J].
Duke, JM ;
Aull-Hyde, R .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2002, 42 (1-2) :131-145
[4]   Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the Analytic Hierarchy Process [J].
Forman, E ;
Peniwati, K .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1998, 108 (01) :165-169
[5]   GROUP-PREFERENCE AGGREGATION METHODS EMPLOYED IN AHP - AN EVALUATION AND AN INTRINSIC PROCESS FOR DERIVING MEMBERS WEIGHTAGES [J].
RAMANATHAN, R ;
GANESH, LS .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1994, 79 (02) :249-265
[6]   AXIOMATIC FOUNDATION OF THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS [J].
SAATY, TL .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1986, 32 (07) :841-855
[7]  
Saaty TL., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation
[8]   On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP [J].
Xu, ZS .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2000, 126 (03) :683-687