Abstract
This paper presents a new procedure, to which we have given the name Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures (AIPS), whose objective is to deal with multiactor decision making when using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as the methodological support. This procedure incorporates ideas similar to Borda count methods and transfers to the case of preference structures the principle of aggregation employed in the two approaches traditionally followed in AHP-group decision making (aggregation of individual judgments and aggregation of individual priorities). The new aggregation method allows us to capture: (i) the richness of uncertainty inherent to human beings; (ii) the vision of each decision maker within the context of the problem; (iii) the interdependencies between the alternatives being compared and (iv) the intensities of the preferences that each decision maker gives to these interdependencies. From the preference structure distribution associated to each decision maker, this new approach (AIPS) provides the holistic importance of each alternative and ranking, as well as the most representative preference structure distribution for the group. The knowledge derived from these could be employed as an initial step in the search for consensus, which characterises the negotiation processes followed by the actors involved in the resolution of decisional problems.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aczél J., Saaty T. L. (1983) Procedures for Synthesizing Ratio Judgements. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27(1): 93–102
Altuzarra, A., J. M. Moreno-Jiménez, and M. Salvador. (2005). “Searching for consensus in AHP-group decision making. A Bayesian approach,” Proceedings CODAWORK’05, Gerona
Bryson N. (1996) Group Decision Making and the analytic hierarchy process: exploring the consensus-relevant information content. Computers and Operations Research 23: 27–35
Condon E., Golden B., Wasil E. (2003) Visualizing group decisions in the analytic hierarchy process. Computers and Operations Research 30(10): 1435–1445
Dyer R. F., Forman E. H. (1992) Group Decision Support with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Decision Support Systems 8: 99–124
Escobar M. T., Aguarón J., Moreno-Jiménez J. M. (2004a) A Note on AHP Group Consistency for the Row Geometric Mean Priorization Procedure. European Journal of Operational Research 153: 318–322
Escobar, M. T. et al. (2004b). “Weighted Approval Voting with AHP for e-cognocracy,” Presented in EURO XX. Rhodes (Greece)
Forman E., Peniwati K. (1998) Aggregating individual judgements and priorities with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research 108: 165–169
Iz P. H., Gardiner L. R. (1993) Analysis of multiple criteria decision support systems for cooperative groups. Group Decision and Negotiation 2: 61–79
Ludwin W. B. (1978) Strategic voting and the Borda method. Public Choice 33: 85–90
Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. (2003). “Los Métodos Estadísticos y el Nuevo Método Científico,” in: J. M. Casas and A. Pulido (eds.), Información económica y técnicas de análisis en el siglo XXI: INE, pp. 331–348. ISBN 84-260-3611-2
Moreno-Jiménez J. M. et al. (2005) A Spreadsheet Module for consistent consensus building in AHP-Group Decision Making. Group Decision and Negotiation 14(2): 89–108
Moreno-Jiménez J. M., Polasek W. (2003) e-Democracy and Knowledge. A Multicriteria Framework for the New Democratic Era. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 12: 163–176
Moreno-Jiménez J. M., Vargas L. (1993) A probabilistic study of preference structures in the Analytic Hierarchy Process with interval judgments. Mathematical Computer Modelling 17(4/5): 73–81
Ramanathan R., Ganesh L. S. (1994) Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: an evaluation and intrisic process for deriving members’ weightages. European Journal of Operational Research 79: 249–265
Roy B. (1993) Decision science or decision-aid science? European Journal of Operational Research 66: 184–203
Saari D. (1990) The Borda dictionary. Social Choice and Welfare 7: 279–317
Saaty T. L. (1977) A Scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15(3): 234–281
Saaty T.L. (1980) Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Mc Graw-Hill, New York, 2nd print 1990, RSW Pub. Pittsburgh
Saaty, T. L. (1989). “Group Decision Making and the AHP,” in: B. L. Golden, E. A. Wasil, and P. T. Harker (eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Application and Studies, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 59–67
Van den Honert R. C. (2001) Decisional power in Group Decision Making: a note on the allocation of group members’ weights in the multiplicative AHP and SMART. Group Decision and Negotiation 10(3): 275–286
Van den Honert R. C., Lootsma F. A. (1997) Group preference aggregation in the multiplicative AHP: the model of the group decision process and Pareto optimality. European Journal of Operational Research 96(2): 363–370
Xu Z. (2000) On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research 126: 683–687
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Stephen Wilkins for his help in the preparation of the final version of the text.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Escobar, M.T., Moreno-jiménez, J.M. Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in Ahp-Group Decision Making. Group Decis Negot 16, 287–301 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-006-9050-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-006-9050-x