Combining FAHP with MDS to Analyze the Key Factors of Different Consumer Groups for Tablet PC Purchasing

  • Chen-Shu Wang
  • Shiang-Lin Lin
  • Heng-Li Yang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 253)


People living become highly informationized, resulting in Tablet PC has developed vigorously in recent years. To understand the consideration of the customers when purchasing Tablet PC is getting important. This study applies Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) to find out the key factors affecting the consumer’s purchasing of Tablet PC. Further, combining Multidimensional Scaling (MDS), decision maker can realize that the similarity and difference among the consumer groups. Through literature review and expert interview, we select appropriate evaluation components to construct the hierarchical structure of evaluation and conduct the AHP questionnaire on 15 experts. The FAHP analysis results show that the importance of evaluation criteria in following order: operating system, color and hardware while customer intend to buy a Tablet PC. Furthermore, through the perceptual map of MDS, we could be find out the consumer groups of Businessman and Officer, as well as Student and Housewife, have similar demands when purchasing Tablet PC.


Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) Multidimensional scaling (MDS) Tablet PC 


  1. 1.
    Anderson JE, Schwager PH, Kerns RL (2006) The drivers for acceptance of tablet PCs by faculty in a college of business. JISE 17(4):429Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barton C, Collura K (2003) Catalyst for change. The J 31(4):39–41Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lomas C, Rauch U (2003) Learning with tablet PCs: true learning tools or trendy devices. Syllabus 17(2):19–20Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McCloskey P (2002) Tablet PCs stake out higher ed. Syllabus 16(5):18–20Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):231–281Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saaty TL (1980) Analytic hierarchy process. Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mahdavi I, Fazlollahtabar H, Heidarzade A, Mahdavi-Amiri N, Rooshan YI (2008) A heuristic methodology for multi-criteria evaluation of web-based e-learning systems based on user satisfaction. J Appl Sci 8(24):4603–4609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shee DY, Tzeng GH, Tang TI (2003) AHP, fuzzy measure and fuzzy integral approaches for the appraisal of information service providers in Taiwan. J Glob Inf Technol Manag 6(1):8–30Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(3):233–247CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chiou HK, Tzeng GH, Cheng DC (2005) Evaluating sustainable fishing development strategies usingfuzzy MCDM approach. Omega 33(3):223–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Torgerson WS (1952) Multidimensional scaling: I. Theory and method. Pstchometrika 17(4):401–419CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen MF, Tzeng GH, Ding CG (2008) Combining fuzzy AHP with MDS in identifying the preference similarity of alternatives. Appl Soft Comput 8(1):110–117Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kruskal JB, Wish M (1978) Multidimensional Scaling. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Information and Logistics ManagementNational Taipei University of TechnologyTaipeiChina
  2. 2.Department of Management Information SystemsNational Chengchi UniversityTaipeiChina

Personalised recommendations