A Modified Hybrid Objective Model to Calculate the Weights of Cause and Effect Criteria in a System: DEMATEL and DEVELOPED SWARA (D-DS) Based Model

[1] Aghdaie M.H., Zolfani S.H., Zavadskas E.K., Decision making in machine tool selection: an integrated approach with SWARA and COPRAS-G methods, InzinerineEkonomika-Eng. Econ, 24, 2013, 5–17. Search in Google Scholar

[2] Agrawal N., KantS., Integrated Fuzzy-Dematel, Fuzzy-Topsis Approach for Supplier Selection: A Case Study. Advanced Research in Electrical and Electronic Engineering. Volume 5, Issue 2, April-June, 2018,pp. 129-133. Search in Google Scholar

[3] Ahmadi H., Nilashi M., O Ibrahim., Organizational decision to adopt hospital information system: an empirical investigation in the case of Malaysian public hospitals, Int. J. Med. Inform, 84, 2015, 166–188. Search in Google Scholar

[4] Ahmadi H., Rad M.S., Nilashi M., Ibrahim O., A Almaee., Ranking the Microlevel critical factors of electronic medical records adoption using TOPSIS method, Health Inf, 4, 2013. Search in Google Scholar

[5] Alimardani M., Hashemkhani Zolfani S., Aghdaie M.H., Tamoˇsaitien˙e J., A novel hybrid SWARA and VIKOR methodology for supplier selection in an agile environment, Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ, 19, 2013, 533–548. Search in Google Scholar

[6] Asad M.M., Mohajerani N., Nourseresh M., Prioritizing factors affecting customer satisfaction in the internet banking system based on cause and effect relationships, Proc Econ Finance,36,2016,210–219. Search in Google Scholar

[7] Aydin F., Gümüs B., Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods for the assessment of optimal SVC location, BULLETIN OF THE POLISH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES TECHNICAL SCIENCES, Vol. 70(2), 2022. Search in Google Scholar

[8] Cebi S., Determining importance degrees of website design parameters based on interactions and types of websites, Decision Support Systems, vol. 54, no. 2, 2013, pp. 1030–1043. Search in Google Scholar

[9] Chauhan A., Singh A., Jharkharia S., An interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and decision-making trail and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method approach for the analysis of barriers of waste recycling in India. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2018, 68, 100–110. Search in Google Scholar

[10] Chaurasiya R., Jain D., Hybrid MCDM method on pythagorean fuzzy set and its application, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(2), 2022, 76-105. Search in Google Scholar

[11] Chiang K., Weight Determination for Consistently Ranking Alternatives in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, Applied Mathematical Modeling, 34(7),2009, 1779-1787. Search in Google Scholar

[12] Diakoulaki D., Mavrotas G., Papayannakis L., Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the CRITIC method, Computers and Operations Research, 22, 1995, 763-770. Search in Google Scholar

[13] Dhurkari R.K., MCDM METHODS: PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT,RAIRO-Oper. Res. 56 2022, https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2022060. Search in Google Scholar

[14] Edwards W., Barron H., SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multi attribute Utility Measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(3), 1994,306-325. Search in Google Scholar

[15] Ergun A.T., Kuruoglu E., Visual program application for supplier selection using fuzzy DEMATEL and fuzzy AHP. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK 2017), Antalya, Turkey, 5–8 October,2017; pp. 1055–1060. Search in Google Scholar

[16] Fontela E., Gabus A., The DEMATEL observer, DEMATEL 1976 report. Switzerland Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Center,1976. Search in Google Scholar

[17] Ginevicius R., PodvezkoV., Objective and subjective approaches to determining the criterion weight in multi criteria models. Proceedings of International Conference RelStat, Transport and Telecommunication,6(1),2005,133-137. Search in Google Scholar

[18] Heidarzade F., Varzandeh M.H.M., Rahbari O., Zavadskas E.K.., Vafaeipour M, Placement of wind farms based on a hybrid multi criteria decision making for Iran, In Proceedings of the 4th World Sustainability Forum,4, 2014, 1–20. Search in Google Scholar

[19] Hsuan-Shih Lee., Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng., Weichung Yeih., Yu-Jie Wang., Shing-Chih Yang., Revised DEMATEL: Resolving the Infeasibility of DEMATEL. Applied Mathematical Modeling, Volume 37,2013,pp 6746–6757. Search in Google Scholar

[20] Huang C.Y., Shyu J.Z.,. Tzeng G.H., Reconfiguring the innovation policy portfolios for Taiwan’s SIP mall industry, Technovation, vol. 27, no. 12, 2007,pp. 744–765. Search in Google Scholar

[21] Hung Y.H., Huang T.L.,. Hsieh J.C., Tsuei H.J., Cheng C.C., Tzeng G.H., Online reputation management for improving marketing by using a hybrid MCDM model, Knowl. Based Syst, 35, 2012, 87–93. Search in Google Scholar

[22] Jamshidi A., Rahimi S.A., Ait-kadi D., Ruiz A., A comprehensive fuzzy risk-based maintenance framework for prioritization of medical devices, Appl. Soft Comput, 32,2015, 322–334. Search in Google Scholar

[23] Jing Li., Chi-Hui Wu L., Chien-Wen Chen., Yi-Fen Huang., Ching-Torng Lin., Apply Fuzzy DEMATEL to Explore the Decisive Factors of the Auto Lighting Aftermarket Industry in Taiwan. Mathematics, 8, 1187,2020, doi:10.3390/math8071187. Search in Google Scholar

[24] Karabasevic D., Stanujkic D., Urosevic S., The MCDM model for personnel selection based on SWARA and ARAS methods. Management, 77,2015, 43-52. DOI: 10.7595/management.fon.2015.0029. Search in Google Scholar

[25] Karabasevic D., StanujkicD., UrosevicS., Maksimovic M., Selection of candidates in the mining industry based on the application of the SWARA and the MULTIMOORA methods. Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 20(2), 2015, 116-124. Search in Google Scholar

[26] Karabasevic D., Stanujkic D., Urosevic S., Maksimovic M., An approach to personnel selection based on Swara and Waspas methods. Bizinfo (Blace), 7(1), 2016, 1-11. DOI: 10.5937/bizinfo1601001K. Search in Google Scholar

[27] Keeney R. L., Raiffa H., Decisions with Multiple Objectives. Wiley, New York,1976. Search in Google Scholar

[28] Kerˇsulien˙e V., Turskis Z., Integrated fuzzy multiple criteria decision making model for architect selection, Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ, 17, 2011, 645–666. Search in Google Scholar

[29] Kerˇsuliene V., Zavadskas E.K., Turskis Z., Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA), J. Bus. Econ. Manage,11, 2010, 243–258. Search in Google Scholar

[30] Khalili-Damghani K., Aminzadeh-Goharrizi B., Rastegar S., Aminzadeh-Goharrizi B., Solving land-use suitability analysis and planning problem by a hybrid meta-heuristic algorithm, International Journal of Geographical Information Science, vol. 28, no. 12, 2014, pp. 2390–2416. Search in Google Scholar

[31] Khazai B., Merz M., Schulz C., Borst D., An integrated indicator framework for spatial assessment of industrial and social vulnerability to indirect disaster losses, Natural Hazards, vol. 67, no. 2, 2013, pp. 145–167. Search in Google Scholar

[32] Kijewska K., Torbacki W., Iwan S., Application of AHP and DEMATEL Methods in Choosing and Analysing the Measures for the Distribution of Goods in Szczecin Region.Sustainability,2018, 10, 2365, doi:10.3390/su10072365. Search in Google Scholar

[33] Kulak O., Goren H.G., Supciller A.A., A new multi criteria decision making approach for medical imaging systems considering risk factors, Appl. Soft Comput, 35, 2015, 931–941. Search in Google Scholar

[34] Li M., Jin L., Wang J., A new MCDM method combining QFD with TOPSIS for knowledge management system selection from the user’s perspective in intuitionistic fuzzy environment, Appl. Soft Comput, 21, 2014, 28–37. Search in Google Scholar

[35] Ma J., Fan Z.P., Huangc L.H., A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights. European Journal of Operations Research, 112,397-404, 1999. Search in Google Scholar

[36] MacCrimmon K.R., Decision making Among Multiple-attribute Alternatives: a Survey and Consolidated Approach, In, DTIC Document, 1968. Search in Google Scholar

[37] Madanchian M., Taherdoost H., Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods and Concepts, Encyclopedia, 2023, 3, 77–87. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010006. Search in Google Scholar

[38] Mardani A., Nilashi M., Zakuan N., Loganathan N., Soheilirad S., Saman M.Z.M., Ibrahim O., A systematic review and meta-Analysis of SWARA and WASPAS methods: Theory and applications with recent fuzzy developments, Applied Soft Computing,57,265–292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2017.03.045. Search in Google Scholar

[39] Mardani A., Jusoh A., Zavadskas E.K., Zakuan N., Valipour A., Kazemilari M., Proposing a new hierarchical framework for the evaluation of quality management practices: a new combined fuzzy hybrid MCDM approach, J.Bus. Econ. Manage. 17 (2016) 1–16. Search in Google Scholar

[40] Narges Taati S., Esmaili-Dooki A., A hybrid method of Fuzzy DEMATEL/AHP/VIKOR approach to rank and select the best hospital nurses of a Years: A case study.J. Appl. Res. Ind. Eng. 4(2),2017,116-132. Search in Google Scholar

[41] ODUG.O., Weighting Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision Making Technique, J. Appl. Sci.Environ. Manage. Vol. 23 (8),2019, 1449-1457. https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v23i8.7. Search in Google Scholar

[42] Osintsev N., Rakhmangulov A., Baginova V., EVALUATION OF LOGISTIC FLOWS IN GREEN SUPPLY CHAINS BASED ON THE COMBINED DEMATEL-ANP METHOD,Mechanical Engineering Vol.19,No3,Special Issue, 2021, pp. 473 - 498. https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME210505061O Search in Google Scholar

[43] Pamučar D., Stević Ž., Sremac S., A New Model for Determining Weight Coefficients of Criteria in MCDM Models: Full Consistency Method (FUCOM),Symmetry, 10(9), 2018,393. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10090393 Search in Google Scholar

[44] Pamučar D., Mihajlović M., Obradović R., Atanasković P., Novel approach to group multi-criteria decision making based on interval rough numbers: Hybrid DEMATELANP-MAIRCA model, Expert Systems with Applications, 88, 2017, 58-80. Search in Google Scholar

[45] Patil S.K., Kant R., A hybrid approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL and FMCDM to predict success of knowledge management adoption in supply chain, Appl. Soft Comput,18, 2014, 126–135. Search in Google Scholar

[46] Pan J. N., Ngnyen H. T. N., Achieving customer satisfaction through product–service systems. Eur J Oper Res,247,2015,179–190. Search in Google Scholar

[47] Peng Y., Wang G., Wang H., User preferences based software defect detection algorithms selection using MCDM, Inf. Sci. 191, 2012, 3–13. Search in Google Scholar

[48] Peng Y., Kou G., Wang G., Shi Y., FAMCDM. A fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms, Omega, 39, 2011,677–689. Search in Google Scholar

[49] Perry C., Liu Y., Huai-Wei Lo., James J.H. Liou., A Combination of DEMATEL and BWM-Based ANP Methods for Exploring the Green Building Rating System in Taiwan.Sustainability,2020, 12, 3216, doi:10.3390/su12083216. Search in Google Scholar

[50] Quang N.H., Yu V.F., Lin A.C., Dat L.Q., Chou S.Y., Parting curve selection and evaluation using an extension of fuzzy MCDM approach, Appl. Soft Comput,13, 2013, 1952–1959. Search in Google Scholar

[51] Rezaei J., Best-worst Multi-criteria Decision-making Method, Omega, 53, 2015,49-57. Search in Google Scholar

[52] Roberts R., Goodwin P., Weight approximations in multi-attribute decision models, Journal of Multi criteria Decision Analysis, 2002, 11, 291-303, https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.320. Search in Google Scholar

[53] Ruzgys A., Volvačiovas R., Ignatavičius Č.,Turskis Z., Integrated evaluation of external wallinsulation in residential buildings using SWARA-TODIM MCDM method. Journal of Civil Engineeringand Management, 20(1), 2014,103-110, DOI: 10.3846/13923730.2013.843585. Search in Google Scholar

[54] Saaty T.L., Analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980. Search in Google Scholar

[55] Shannon C.E., Weaver W., The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press, 1947. Search in Google Scholar

[56] Sheng-Li Si., Xiao-Yue You., Hu-Chen Liu., Ping Zhang., DEMATEL Technique: A Systematic Review of the State-of-the-Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Volume 2018, Article ID 3696457, 33 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3696457. Search in Google Scholar

[57] Shieh J.I., Wu H.H., Huang K.K., A DEMATEL method in identifying key success factors of hospital service, Knowl.-Based Syst, 23, 3, 2010, 277–282. Search in Google Scholar

[58] Shukla S., Mishra P.K., Jain R., Yadav H.C., An integrated decision making approach for ERP system selection using SWARA and PROMETHEE method. International Journal of Intelligent Enterprise, 3(2), 2016, 120-147. DOI: 10.1504/IJIE.2016.076041. Search in Google Scholar

[59] Stanujkic D., Karabasevic D., Zavadskas E. K., A framework for the Selection of a packaging design based on the SWARA method. Inzinerine Ekonomika -Engineering Economics, 26(2), 2015,181-187. DOI: 10.5755/j01.ee.26.2.8820. Search in Google Scholar

[60] Tzeng M.L., Using hybrid MCDM to evaluate the service quality expectation in linguistic preference, Applied Soft Computing, vol. 11, no. 8, 2011, pp. 4551–4562. Search in Google Scholar

[61] Von Winterfeldt D., Edwards W., Decision analysis and behavioral research, Cambridge University Press,1986. Search in Google Scholar

[62] Wang Z., Mathiyazhagan K., Xu L., Diabat A., A decision making trial and evaluation laboratory approach to analyze the barriers to Green Supply Chain Management adoption in a food packaging company, J Clean Prod,117,2016,19–28. Search in Google Scholar

[63] Watróbski J. et al., Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection, Omega,2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2018.07.004. Search in Google Scholar

[64] Yazdani-Chamzini A., Shariati S., Yakhchali S.H., Zavadskas E.K., Proposing a new methodology for prioritising the investment strategies in the private sector of Iran, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, vol. 27, no. 1, 2014, pp. 320–345. Search in Google Scholar

[65] Zhang L., Sun X., Xue H., Identifying critical risks in Sponge City PPP projects using DEMATEL method: A case study of China, J. Clean. Prod. 226,2019, 949–958. Search in Google Scholar

[66] Žižović M., Pamucar D., New model for determining criteria weights: Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) model. Decision Making, Applications in Management and Engineering, 2(2), 2019,126-137. Search in Google Scholar

[67] Zolfani S.H., Esfahani M.H., Bitarafan M., Zavadskas E.K., Arefi S.L., Developing a new hybrid MCDM method for selection of the optimal alternative of mechanical longitudinal ventilation of tunnel pollutants during automobile accidents, Transport,28, 2013, 89–96. Search in Google Scholar

[68] Zolfani S.H., Saparauskas J., New application of SWARA method in prioritizing sustainability assessment indicators of energy system, Eng.Econ, 24, 2013, 408–414. Search in Google Scholar

[69] Zolfani S.H., Zavadskas E. K., Turskis Z., Design of products with both International and Local perspectives based on Yin-Yang balance theory and SWARA method. Ekonomskaistraživanja- Economic Research, 26(2), 2013,153-166. DOI: 10.1080/1331677X.2013.11517613. Search in Google Scholar