KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 22, Issue 11, pp 4580–4592 | Cite as

Vehicle Safety Analysis based on a Hybrid Approach Integrating DEMATEL, ANP and ER

  • S. R. Seyedalizadeh GanjiEmail author
  • Amir Abbas Rassafi
  • Ali Abdi Kordani
Transportation Engineering


Vehicle related safety is the principal focus of many agencies and organizations targeting road safety issues. There are many conflicting factors contributing to safety in motor vehicle operations. Unfortunately, the lack of reliable crash data makes it extremely difficult to evaluate the crash causations associated with defective vehicles. Furthermore, clarifying the interrelationships among vehicle related factors causing accidents is very complicated when the conventional decision techniques are used. This study aims to employ a hybrid decision method based on DEMATEL (decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory) and ANP (Analytic Network Process) to construct an Influence Relations Map (IRM) as well as obtain the influential weight of vehicle-related criteria. An empirical case study is provided to demonstrate the implementation process. This paper also employs an Evidential Reasoning algorithm (so-called ER) for assessing the inter-city buses in terms of vehicle safety in order to deal with the uncertainties associated with incomplete input data. The ER improves decision making process by using a belief decision matrix and the Demspster-Shafer theory of evidence. The results and findings reveal that the braking system is the most important criterion impacting vehicle safety, followed by fuel supply and electrical systems.


motor vehicle-related safety Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making (MCDM) DEMATEL ANP Influence Relations Map (IRM) Evidential Reasoning (ER) approach 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. ADB (1996). Road Safety Guidelines for the Asian and Pacific Region. Vehicle Safety and Standards, Draft Report (RETA 5620), Asian Development Bank.
  2. Asander, S. (1992). “Vehicle Safety Inspection Systems.” Wheels’ 92 Conference and Workshop, November 16th to November 17th, Sydney.Google Scholar
  3. Beynon, M. J. (2002). “DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis, including an understanding of uncertainty.” European Journal of Operation Research, Vol. 140, No. 1, pp. 148–164, DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00230-2.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Beynon, M. J., Curry, B., and Morgan, P. H. (2000). “The Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence: An alternative approach to multi-criteria decision modelling.” Omega, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 37–50, DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0483(99)00033-X.Google Scholar
  5. Bull, J. P. and Roberts, B. J. (1973). “Road accident statistics-A comparison of police and hospital information.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 45–53, DOI: 10.1016/0001-4575(73)90004-3.Google Scholar
  6. Chang, P. T., Huang, L. C., and Lin, H. J. (2000). “The fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy statistics and membership function fitting and an application to the human resources.” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 112, No. 3, pp. 511–520, DOI: 10.1016/S0165-0114(98)00067-0.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, Y. C., Lien, H. P., and Tzeng, G. H. (2010). “Measures and evaluation for environment watershed plan using a novel hybrid MCDM model.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 926–938, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.04.068.Google Scholar
  8. Crain, W. N. (1981). Vehicle safety inspections: How effective?, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington DC, Google Scholar
  9. Curtis, I. A. (2004). “Valuing ecosystem goods and services: A new approach using a surrogate market and the combination of a multiple criteria analysis and a Delphi panel to assign weights to the attributes.” Ecological Economics, Vol. 50, Nos. 3–4, pp. 163–194, DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.003.Google Scholar
  10. Dempster, A. P. (1967). “Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multi-valued mapping.” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 325–339.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. FORS (1999). “Cost effectiveness of periodic motor vehicle inspection}.” A Report by Federal Office of Road Safety, Keatsdale Ply Ltd., Australia}, Vol. 39}, pp. 43–47,
  12. Forest, R. and Youngman, J. H. R. (1991). “Compulsory periodic vehicle inspections.” Sixth International Pacific Conference on Automotive Engineering, October 28th to November, Google Scholar
  13. Gabus, A. and Fontela, E. (1972). World problems an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland, Google Scholar
  14. Gardner, B. (1995). “Vehicle roadworthiness.” From Proceedings of Vehicle Accidents: Their cause, reconstruction, law. Grzebieta, R.H., de Forest, R. & Rechnitzer, G. (Editors). Melbourne, pp. 83–90.Google Scholar
  15. Guneri, A. F., Cengiz, M., and Seker, S. (2009). “A fuzzy ANP approach to ship yard location selection.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 7992–7999, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.059.Google Scholar
  16. Hoque, M. S. and Hasan, M. R. (2007). “Involvement of vehicle factors in road accidents.” Journal of Civil Engineering (IEB), Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 17–27, DOI: 10.5812/jhs.6838.Google Scholar
  17. Huang, C. Y., Tzeng, G. H., and Ho, W. R. (2011). “System on chip design service e-business value maximization through a novel MCDM framework.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 7947–7962, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.022.Google Scholar
  18. Idaho Motor Carrier Safety Demonstration Project (1982). Annual Report. Department of Law Enforcement, Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety, ID, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Jacobs, G. D. and Sayer, I. (1983). “Road accidents in developing countries.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 337–353, DOI: 10.1016/0001-4575(83)90013-1.Google Scholar
  20. Leung, L. C., Hui, Y. V., and Zheng, M. (2003). “Analysis of compatibility between interdependent matrices in ANP.” Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 54, No. 7, pp. 758–768, DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601569.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Li, C. W. and Tzeng, G. H. (2009a). “Identification of interrelationship of key customers’ needs based on structural model for services/capabilities provided by a semiconductor-intellectual property mall.” Applied Mathematics and Computation, Vol. 215, No. 6, pp. 2001–2010, DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2009.07.059.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Li, C. W. and Tzeng, G. H. (2009b). “Identification of a threshold value for the DEMATEL method using the maximum mean de-entropy algorithm to find critical services provided by a semiconductor intellectual property mall.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 9891–9898, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.073.Google Scholar
  23. Liou, J. J. H., Tzeng, G. H., and Chang, H. C. (2007). “Airline safety measurement using a hybrid model.” Air Transport Management, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 243–249, DOI: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2007.04.008.Google Scholar
  24. Mosadeghi, R., Warnken, J., Tomlinson, R., and Mirfenderesk, H. (2015). “Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a spatial multicriteria decision making model for urban land-use planning.” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 49, pp. 54–65, DOI: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2014.10.001.Google Scholar
  25. Murry, J. W. and Hammons, J. O. (1995). “Delphi: A versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research.” Review of Higher Education, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 423–436, Google Scholar
  26. Nicholl, L. P. (1980). The use of hospital in-patient data in the analysis of the injuries sustained by road accident casualties. Report No. SR268. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne. Berkshire, England. Google Scholar
  27. Onut, S., Tuzkaya, U. R., and Torun, E. (2011). “Selecting container port via a fuzzy ANP based approach: A case study in the Marmara Region, Turkey.” Transport Policy, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 182–193, DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.08.001.Google Scholar
  28. Ou Yang, Y. P., Shieh, H. M., and Tzeng, G. H. (2013). “A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP for information security risk control assessment.” Information Sciences, Vol. 232, pp. 482–500, DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2011.09.012.Google Scholar
  29. Yang, Y. P. O., Shieh, H. M., Leu, J. D., and Tzeng, G. H. (2008). “A novel hybrid MCDM model combined with DEMATEL and ANP with applications.” International Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 160–168, Google Scholar
  30. Pienaar, I. (1986). Nasionale Ongeluk Steekproef (NOSS), National Institute for Transport and Road Research Final Report. CSIR, South Africa, December.Google Scholar
  31. Podvezko, V. and Sivilevicius, H. (2013). “The use of AHP and rank correlation methods for determining the significance of the interaction between the elements of a transport system having a strong influence on traffic safety.” Transport, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 389–403, DOI: 10.3846/16484142.2013.866980?journalCode=tran20.Google Scholar
  32. Randhawa, S. U., Miller, S. G., Bell, C. A., and Montagne, P. E. (1998). “A study of commercial vehicle safety alliance’s out-of-service criteria.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 61–67, DOI: 10.1016/S0001-4575(97)00062-6.Google Scholar
  33. Rassafi, A. A., Ganji, S. S., and Pourkhani, H. (2017). “Road safety assessment under uncertainty using a Multi Attribute Decision Analysis based on Dempster–Shafer theory.” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, DOI: 10.1007/s12205-017-1854-5.Google Scholar
  34. Rechnitzer, G., Haworth, N., and Kowadlo, N. (2000). The effect of vehicle roadworthiness on crash incidence and severity, Report No. 164. Monash University, Accident Research Centre, Clayton, Australia. Google Scholar
  35. Robbins, S. P. (1994). Management. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  36. Rompe, K. and Seul, E. (1985). Commissioned Report for the Director General of Transport of the Commission of the European Committee.Google Scholar
  37. Saaty, T. L. (1977). “Scenarios and priorities in transport planning: Application to the Sudan.” Transportation Research, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 343–350, DOI: 10.1016/0041-1647(77)90044-2.Google Scholar
  38. Saaty T. L. (1977). “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures.” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 15, pp. 59–62, DOI: 10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. Saaty, T. L. (1994). “Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process.” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 74, No. 3, pp. 426–447, DOI: 10.1016/0377-2217(94)90222-4.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. Saaty, T. L. (1996). “Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  42. Saaty, T. L. (1999). “Fundamentals of the analytic network process.” In: Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on the analytic hierarchy process.Google Scholar
  43. Saaty, T. L. (2004). “Fundamentals of the analytic network process — Dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network.” Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 129–157, DOI: 10.1007/s11518-006-0158-y.Google Scholar
  44. Sabey, B. E. and Staughton, G. C. (1975). “Interacting roles of road environment, vehicle and road user in accidents.” In: Fifth International Conference of the International Association for Accident and Traffic Medicine, London, UK. DOI: Google Scholar
  45. Schoor, O. V., Niekerk, J. L. Van, and Grobbelaar, B. (2001). “Mechanical failures as a contributing cause to motor vehicle accidents -South Africa.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 33, No. 6, pp. 713–721, DOI: 10.1016/S0001-4575(00)00083-X.Google Scholar
  46. Schroer, B. J. and Peyton, W. (1979). “The effects of automobile inspections on accident rates.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 61–68, DOI: 10.1016/0001-4575(79)90040-X.Google Scholar
  47. Sevkli, M., Oztekin, A., Uysal, O., Torlak, G., Turkyilmaz, A., and Delen, D. (2012). “Development of a fuzzy ANP based SWOT analysis for the airline industry in Turkey.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 14–24, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.047.Google Scholar
  48. Shafer, G. (1976). A mathematical theory of evidence. University Press, Princeton.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. Shinar, D., Treat, J. R., and Mcdonald, S. T. (1983). “The validity of police reported accident data.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 175–191, DOI: 10.1016/0001-4575(83)90018-0.Google Scholar
  50. Sivilevicius, H. and Maskeliunaite, L. (2012). “The criteria for identifying the quality of passengers’ transportation by railway and their ranking using AHP method.” Transport, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 368–381, DOI: 10.3846/transport.2010.46.Google Scholar
  51. Stoke, C. B. and Simpson, C. H. (1982). Truck safety, regulation, inspection, and enforcement in Virginia. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC, DOI: Google Scholar
  52. Sufian, A. A., Khan, S. M., Ahmed, I., Islam, S., and Saha, N. (2013). “Safety Analysis: Observed Deficiencies in Existing Transportation System of Bangladesh.” International Journal of Urban Planning and Transportation, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 2051–5820, DOI: Scholar
  53. Thorson, J. and Sande, J. (1969). “Hospital statistics on road traffic accidents.” Proc. 3rd Triennial Congress of the Int. Assoc. for Accident and Traffic Medicine, University of Michigan. Highway Safety Research Institute.Google Scholar
  54. Treat, J. R. (1977). Tri-level study of the causes of traffic accidents: An overview of final results. American Association for Automotive Medicine Conference; USA.Google Scholar
  55. Treat, J. R. (1980). A study of pre crash factors involved in traffic accidents. Highway Safety Research Institute Publication No. HSRI 10/11, 6/1. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  56. Tsai, W. H. and Chou, W. C. (2009). “Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 1444–1458, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2007.11.058.Google Scholar
  57. Tsiporkova, E. and Boeva, V. (2006). “Multi-step ranking of alternatives in a multi-criteria and multi-expert decision making environment.” Information Sciences, Vol. 176, No. 18, pp. 2673–2697, DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2005.11.010.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  58. Tuzkaya, U. R. and Onut, S. (2008). “A fuzzy analytic network process based approach to transportation-mode selection between Turkey and Germany: A case study.” Information Sciences, Vol. 178, No. 15, pp. 3133–3146, DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2008.03.015.Google Scholar
  59. Tzeng, G. H., Chiang, C.-H., and Li, C.-W. (2007). “Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 1028–1044, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2006.02.004.Google Scholar
  60. Tzeng, G. H. and Huang, C. Y. (2011). “Combined DEMATEL technique with hybrid MCDM methods for creating the aspired intelligent global manufacturing & logistics systems.” Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 197, No. 1, pp. 1–32, DOI: 10.1007/s10479-010-0829-4.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. Vaughan, R. (1992). “Vehicle ageing and safety.” Proceedings of Wheels’ 92 Conference and Workshop, Sydney.Google Scholar
  62. Vaughan, R.G. (1993). “Safety maintenance of road vehicles.” Proceeding of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers: Braking of Road Vehicles, March 1993, London. Google Scholar
  63. Vujanovic, D., Momcilovic, V., Bojovic, N., and Papic, V. (2012). “Evaluation of vehicle fleet maintenance management indicators by application of DEMATEL and ANP.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39, No. 12, pp. 10552–10563, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.159.Google Scholar
  64. Wang, Y. L. and Tzeng, G. H. (2012). “Brand marketing for creating brand value based on a MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP and VIKOR methods.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 5600–5615, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.11.057.Google Scholar
  65. White, W. T. (1986a). “Does periodic vehicle inspection prevent accidents?.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 51–62, Google Scholar
  66. World Health Organization (2015). Global status report on road safety.
  67. Wu, W. W. (2008). “Choosing knowledge management strategies by using a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach.” Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 828–835, DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2007.07.025.Google Scholar
  68. Yang, J. B. (2001). “Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainties.” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 131, No. 1, pp. 31–61, DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00441-5.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  69. Yang, J. B. and Xu, D. L. (2002). “Nonlinear information aggregation via evidential reasoning in multi-attribute decision analysis under uncertainty.” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics—Part A, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 376–393, DOI: 10.1109/TSMCA.2002.802809.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Civil Engineers 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. R. Seyedalizadeh Ganji
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amir Abbas Rassafi
    • 1
  • Ali Abdi Kordani
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of EngineeringImam Khomeini International UniversityQazvinIran

Personalised recommendations