An I-TODIM method for multi-attribute decision making with interval numbers
Interval multi-attribute decision making (I-MADM) is a topic of current interest. Various methods have been proposed to address I-MADM problem. However, applying these methods is becoming increasingly difficult because the behavioural characteristics of the decision maker are often neglected. In this paper, a novel interval TODIM (I-TODIM) method, in which two behavioural characteristics (i.e., reference dependence and loss aversion) of the decision maker are considered, is proposed to address the I-MADM problem. The proposed I-TODIM method is comprised of three modules. First, while considering the reference dependence behaviour of the decision maker, the relative gain and loss degrees of each alternative for each attribute are calculated. Next, the relative perceived dominance degree of each alternative for each attribute is computed based on the loss aversion behaviour of the decision maker. After calculating the overall perceived dominance degree of each alternative, the ranking results of the alternatives can be obtained. Finally, an example, a comparison and a simulation analysis are given to illustrate the feasibility and validity of the proposed method.
KeywordsInterval multi-attribute decision making I-TODIM method Gain and loss degrees Perceived dominance degree Ranking
This work was partly supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, Project No. 71271050, 71571040).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Chen FD, Zhang X, Kang F, Fan ZP, Chen X (2010) A method for interval multiple attribute decision making with loss aversion. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information Science and Management Engineering (ISME), Xi’an, China, 453–456Google Scholar
- Fu S, Chen J, Zhou H, Xiao Song D,Y, (2014) Application of multiple attribute decision-making approaches with interval numbers in fields of investment decision. Inform Technol J 13(5):853–858Google Scholar
- Hu JH, Xu Q (2010) Multi-criteria decision making method based on interval number and prospect theory. In: Proceedings of International Conference on E-Product E-Service and E-Entertainment (ICEEE), Henan, China, pp 1–4Google Scholar
- Neumann JLV, Morgensterm OV (1944) The theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
- Ou-Yang YP, Shieh HM, Tzeng GH (2013) A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP for information security risk control assessment. Inform Sci 232(5):482–500Google Scholar
- Palomares I, Liu J, Xu Y, Mart\(\imath \)’nez L (2012) Modelling experts’ attitudes in group decision making. Soft Comput 16(10):1755–1766Google Scholar
- Sheng J, Xie SQ, Pan CY (2001) Probability and mathematical statistics. Higher Education Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
- Simon HA (1945) Adm Behav. Free Press, GlencoeGoogle Scholar
- Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(1):141–162Google Scholar
- Wang XF, Wang JQ, Yang WE (2013) Group decision making approach based on interval-valued intuitionistic linguistic geometric aggregation operators. Int J Intell Inform Database Syst 7(6):516–534Google Scholar
- Yue ZL, Jia YY (2015) A direct projection-based group decision-making methodology with crisp values and interval data. Soft Comput. doi: 10.1007/s00500-015-1953-5