Analyse et classification de la littérature traitant de l'importance relative des critères en aide multicritère à la décision

Issue		RAIRO-Oper. Res. Volume 26, Number 4, 1992


Page(s)		367 - 389
DOI		https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/1992260403671
Published online		06 February 2017

L. ADELMAN, P. J. STICHA and M. L. DONNELL, The Rôle of Task Properties in Determining the Relative Effectiveness of Weighting Techniques, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1984, 33, p. 243-262, III (1 ab, 3 bij, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 c). [Google Scholar]
L. ADELMAN, P. J. STICHA and M. L. DONNELL, An Experimental Investigation of the Relative Effectiveness of Two Techniques for Structuring Multiattributed Hierarchies, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Proc., 1986, 37, p. 188-196, III. [Google Scholar]
J. P. ANCOT, Micro-Qualiflex, an Interactive Software Package for the Determination and Analysis of the Optimal Solution to Decision Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, 1988, II. [Google Scholar]
A. ARBEL, Approximate Articulation of Preference and Priority Derivation, E.J.O.R., 1989, 43, p. 317-326. II (1 a, 3 b, 8 b, 10 b, 15 b). [MR: 1029890] [Zbl: 0697.90003] [Google Scholar]
C. BANA e COSTA, A Multicriteria Decision Aid Methodology to Deal with Conflictuous Situation on Weight, E.J.O.R., n° 26, 1986, p. 22-34, II (1 c, 3 d, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 b, 10 b, 11 b, 12 b). [MR: 846077] [Zbl: 0589.90048] [Google Scholar]
C. BANA e COSTA, A Methodology for Sensitivity Analysis in Three-Criteria Problems: a Case Study in Municipal Management, E.J.O.R., n° 33, 1988, p. 159-173, II (3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b). [Google Scholar]
C. BANA e COSTA, Une méthode pour l'aide à la décision en situations multicritères et multiacteurs, Université de Paris Dauphine, Document du LAMSADE n° 59, 1989, II ( l c , 3 d, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 8 a , 9 b, 10 b, 11 b, 12 b). [Google Scholar]
H. BARRON and C. P. SCHMIDT, Entropy Based Selection with Multiple Objectives, Nav. Res. Logist., 1988 a, 35, p. 643-654. [MR: 981195] [Zbl: 0661.90086] [Google Scholar]
H. BARRON and C. P. SCHMIDT, Sensitivity Analysis of Additive Multi-Attribute Value Models, Oper. Res., 1988 b, 36, p. 122-127, II. [Google Scholar]
J. BARZILAI, W. D. COOK and B. GOLANY, Consistent Weights for Judgements Matrices of the Relative Importance of Alternatives, Oper. Res. Letters, 1987, 6, p. 131-134, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 a, 10 b, 15 b). [MR: 904836] [Zbl: 0622.90004] [Google Scholar]
J. BARZILAI and B. GOLANY, Deriving Weights from Pairwise Comparison Matrices: the Additive Case, Oper. Res. Letters, 1990, 9, p. 407-410, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 a, 10 b, 15 b). [Zbl: 0711.90007] [Google Scholar]
D. I. BATISHEV, V. F. ANUCHIN and D.E. SHAPOSHNIKOV, The Use of the Qualitative Information on the Importance of Particular Criteria for the Computation of Weighting Coefficients in Lewandowski, Volkovich Eds. Multiobjective Problems of Mathematical Programming, Proceedings, Yalta, U.S.S.R., Springer-Verlag, 1988, II (3 b, 4 b, 8 a). [Zbl: 0765.90078] [Google Scholar]
V. BELTON, A Comparison of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and a Simple Multiattribute Value Function, EJOR, n° 26, 1986, p. 7-21, III (1 a, 3 abe, 4 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b). [MR: 846076] [Google Scholar]
V. BELTON and T. GEAR, On a Short-Coming of Saaty's Method of Analytic Hierarchies, Omega, 1983, p. 228-230, II (1 a, 3 b, 8 b, 10 b, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
V. BELTON and T. GEAR, Series of Experiments into the Use of Pairwise Comparison Techniques to Evaluate the Weights, Decision Making with Multiple Objectives, Proceedings, Cleveland, Ohio. Aussi dans V. CHANKONG and Y. Y. HAIMES (eds.), 1983, Decision Making with Multiple Objectives, Springer Verlag, 1984, p.375-385, III (1 a, 3 b, 8 b, 10 b, 16 d). [MR: 872731] [Google Scholar]
V. BELTON and S. VICKERS, Use of Simple Multi-Attribute Value Function Incorporating Visual Interactive Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, in Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, edited by C. BANA e COSTA, Springer-Verlag, 1990, II (1 a, 3 fj, 4 a, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a, 11 a). [Google Scholar]
C. G. E. BOENDER, J. G. De GRAAN and F. A. LOOTSMA, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis with Fuzzy Pairwise Comparisons, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, n° 2, 1989, p. 133-144, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 a, 13 a). [MR: 980343] [Zbl: 0663.62017] [Google Scholar]
K. BORCHERDING, T. EPPEL and D. Von WINTERFELD, Comparison of Weighting Judgments in Multiattribute Utility Measurement Management Sci., 1991, 37, p. 1603-1619, II (3 dj, 16 cd) [Zbl: 0729.91012] [Google Scholar]
D. BOUYSSOU, Approches descriptives et constructives d'aide à la décision, Thèse de 3e cycle, Université de Paris Dauphine, 1984, I (6 ab, 12 a). [Google Scholar]
D. BOUYSSOU, Some Remarks on the Notion of Compensation in M.C.D.M., E.J.O.R., 1986, 26, p. 150-160, IV (8 a, 12 a). [MR: 846086] [Zbl: 0598.90057] [Google Scholar]
D. BOUYSSOU and J. C. VANSNICK, Noncompensatory and Generalized Noncompensatory Preference Structures, Theory and Decision, 1986, 21, p. 251-266, IV (8 a, 12 a). [MR: 861114] [Zbl: 0605.90003] [Google Scholar]
H. D. BRUNK, Mathematical Models for Ranking from Paired Comparison, J. Amer. Statis. Assoc., 1960, 55, p. 503-520, IV. [MR: 115242] [Zbl: 0101.11902] [Google Scholar]
V. CARAOULI, Indices d'importance relative des critères, W.P. LAMSADE (non publié), 1986, I. (1 a, 3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 b, 10 b, 11 b). [Google Scholar]
E. U. CHOU and W. WEDLEY, Optimal Criterion Weights in Multicriteria Decision Making, Decision with Multiple Objectives, Proceedings, Cleveland, Ohion, 1984, p. 345-353, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). [Zbl: 0558.90052] [Google Scholar]
A. T. W. CHU, R. E. KALABA and K. SPINGARN, A Comparison of two Methods for Determining Weights Belonging to Fuzzy Sets, J. Optim. Theor. Appl., 1979, 27, p. 531-538, III (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b, 15 a, 16 c). [MR: 533119] [Zbl: 0377.94002] [Google Scholar]
C. W. CHURCHMANN and R. L. ACKOFF, An Approximate Mesure of Value, Oper. Res., 1954, 2, p. 172-187, II (1 a, 3 cf, 4 a, 8 b, 10 a). [Google Scholar]
C. W. CHURCHMAN, R. L. ACKOFF and E. L. ARNOFF, Introduction to Operations Research (CH. 6: Weighting Objectives), J. Wiley, 1975, New-York, I. [MR: 81815] [Zbl: 0079.35905] [Google Scholar]
M. CLAESSENS, F. LOOTSMA and F. VOGT, An elementary proof of Paelinck's theorem on the convex hull of ranked criterion weights, E.J.O.R., 1991, 52, p. 258, IV. [Zbl: 0727.90040] [Google Scholar]
K. O. COGGER and P. L. YU, Eigenweight Vectors and Least Distance Approximation for Revealed Preference in Pairwise Weight Ratio, J. Optim. Theor. Appl., 1985, 46, p. 483-491, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 5 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b). [MR: 797852] [Zbl: 0552.90050] [Google Scholar]
R. L. COOK and T. R. STEWART, A Comparison of Seven Methods for Obtaining Subjective Descriptions of Judgemtal Policy, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1975, 13, p. 31-45, III (1 a, 3 bdj, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 ac). [Google Scholar]
W. D. COOK and M. KRESS, Deriving Weights from Pairwise Comparison Ratio Matrix: an Axiomatic Approach, E.J.O.R., 1988, 37, p. 355-362, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 10 b). [MR: 970400] [Zbl: 0652.90002] [Google Scholar]
J. P. CRAGIN, The Nature of Importance Perceptions: A Test of a Cognitive Model, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1983, 31, p. 262-276, V. [Google Scholar]
R. M. DAWES and B. CORRIGAN, Linear Models in Decision Making, Psychol. Bull., 1974, 81, p. 95-106, III (3 aj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 ab). [Google Scholar]
R. DRUGMAN, Étude sur la signification pour le décideur des poids dans les méthodes multicritères d'aide à la décision, Mémoire de Licence, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1990, I (1 a, 3 dj). [Google Scholar]
R. T. ECKENRODE, Weighting Multiple Criteria, Management Sci., 1965, 12, p. 180-192, III (1 b, 2 a, 3 bcfj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 a). [Google Scholar]
W. EDWARDS, How to Use Multiattribute Utility Measurement for Social Decision Making, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man. Cyberne., 1977, 7, p. 326-340, II (1 b, 3 j, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 b, 10 a). [Google Scholar]
H. J. EINHORN and R. M. HOGARTH, Unit Weighting Schemes for Decision Making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1975, 13, p. 171-192, III (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b, 16 ac). [Google Scholar]
G. FISCHER, N. DAMODARAN, K. LASKEY and D. LINCOLN, Preferences for Proxy Attributes, Management Sci., 1987, 33, p. 198-214, V. [MR: 905823] [Google Scholar]
B. FISCHHOFF, P. SLOVIC and S. LICHTENSTEIN, Knowing What You Want: Measuring Labile Values, in Bell-Raiffa-Tversky: Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative and Prescriptive Interactions, Cambridge University Press, 1989, p.398-421. V. [Google Scholar]
P. C. FISHBURN, Methods for Estimating Additives Utilities, Management Sci., 1967, 13, p. 435-453, III (1 a, 3 bcdij, 4 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 ab, 10 ab). [Google Scholar]
P. C. FISHBURN, Lexicographic Orders, Utilities and Decision Rules: a Survey, Management Sci., 1974, 20, p. 1442-1471, IV (3 f, 8 a, 12 a). [MR: 363428] [Zbl: 0311.90007] [Google Scholar]
P. C. FISHBURN, Noncompensatory Preferences, Syntheses, 1976, 33, p. 393-403, IV (12 a). [Zbl: 0357.90004] [Google Scholar]
P. C. FISHBURN, A Survey of Multiattribute/Multicriterion Evaluation Theories, in Multiple Criteria Problem Solving, Proceedings, Buffalo (N. Y.), edited by S. ZIONTS, Springer-Verlag, 1977, p. 181-224, IV. [Zbl: 0387.90005] [Google Scholar]
S. I. GASS, The Setting of Weights in Linear Goal Programming Problems, Compters and Oper. Res., 1987, 14, p. 227-229, II (15 b). [Google Scholar]
A. GBODOSSOU, La notion de poids de critères/attributs en analyse multicritère, une étude empirique, Thèse Ph. D., 1986, Université Laval, I (14 a, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
M. GERSCHON, The Role of Weights and Scales in the Applications of Multi-Objective Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1984, n° 14, p. 244-250, III (8 a, 15 b). [Zbl: 0537.90054] [Google Scholar]
W. M. GOLDSTEIN, Judgments of Relative Importance in Decision Making: Global vs Local Interpretation of Subjective Weights, Organ. Behav. Hum. Des. Proc., 1990, 47, p. 313-336, VI (1 a, 3 ej, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b). [Google Scholar]
P. T. HARKER, Alternative Modes of Questionning in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Math. Model., 1987, 9, p. 353-360, II (3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 15 b). [MR: 902229] [Zbl: 0626.90001] [Google Scholar]
R. M. HEELER, C. OKECHUKU and S. REID, Attribute Importance: Contrasting Measurements, J. Marketing Res., 1979, 16, p. 60-93, III (1 a, 3 ej, 4 a, 8 b, 10 ab, 16 c). [Google Scholar]
J. C. HERSHEY, H. C. KUNREUTHER and P. SCHOEMAKER, Sources of Bias in Assessment Procedures for Utility Fuctions, Management Sci., 1982, 28, n° 8, p. 936-954, V. [Zbl: 0487.90013] [Google Scholar]
J. C. HERSHEY and P. SCHOEMAKER, Probability Versus Certainty Equivalence Methods in Utility Measurement: Are They Equivalent?, Management Sci., 1985, 31, p. 1213-1231, V. [Google Scholar]
B. F. HOBBS, A Comparision of Weighting Methods in Power Plant Siting, Decision Sci., 1980, 11, p. 725-737, III (3 abdefj, 8 a, 10 ab, 16 bc). [Google Scholar]
R. M. HOGARTH (ed.), Question Framing and Response Consistency, New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, Jossey-Bass, Publichers, 1982, V. [Google Scholar]
R. D. HOLDER, Somme Comments on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, J. Oper. Res. Soc., 1990, 41, p. 1073-1076, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
D. HORSKY and M. R. RAO, Estimation of Attribute Weights from Preference Comparison, Management Sci., 1984, 30, n° 7, p. 801-822, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b, 11 a). [MR: 756954] [Zbl: 0551.90053] [Google Scholar]
G. P. HUBERT, Multi-Attribute Utility Models: A Review of Field and Field-Like Studies, Management Sci., 1974, 20, p. 1393-1402. [Zbl: 0303.90001] [Google Scholar]
J. JACCARD, D. BRINBERG and L. J. ACKERMAN, Assessing Attribute Importance: a Comparison of Six Methods, J. Consum. Res., 1986, 12, p. 463-468, III (1 a, 3 acj, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 ab, 16 c). [Google Scholar]
E. JACQUET-LAGRÈZE, Binary preference indices: A New Lood on Multicriteria Aggregation Procedures, E.J.O.R., 1982, 10, p. 26-32, IV. [MR: 655495] [Zbl: 0481.90003] [Google Scholar]
E. JACQUET-LAGRÈZE, PREFCALC: Manuel utilisateur, Euro-Décision, 1983, II (1 a, 3 e, 4 b, 5 b, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a, 11 a). [MR: 655495] [Google Scholar]
E. JACQUET-LAGRÈZE and J. SISKOS, Assessing a Set of Additive Utility Functions for Multi criteria Decision-Making, the U.T.A. Method, E.J.O.R., 1982,10, p. 151-164, II (1 a, 3 e, 4 b, 5 b, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a, 11 a). [MR: 655495] [Zbl: 0481.90078] [Google Scholar]
A. K. JAIN, F. ACITO, M. K. MALHOTRA and V. MAHAJAN, A Comparison of the Internal Validity of Alternative Parameter Estimation Methods in Decompositional Multiattribute Preference Models, J. Market. Res., 1979, 16, p. 313-322, III (3 a, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 9 b, 10 b, 11 a). [Google Scholar]
E. M. JOHNSON andG. P. HUBERT , The Technology of Utility Assessment, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man. Cybernet. smc-7, 1977, p. 311-325, III (3 fij, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 ab). [Google Scholar]
D. KAHNEMAN and A. TVERSKY, Choices, Values and Frames, Amer. Psychol., 1984, 39, p. 341-350, V. [Google Scholar]
R. D. KAMENETZKY, Relationship Between the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Additive Value Function, Decision Sci., 1982, 13, p. 702-713, III (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 10 b, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
R. L. KEENEY, An Illustrated Procedure for Assessing Multiattributed Utility Functions, Sloan Manag. Rev., 1972, 14, p. 37-50, VI (4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). [Google Scholar]
R. L. KEENEY, The Art of Assessing Multi-Attribute Utility Functions, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1977, 19, p. 267-310, VI. [Google Scholar]
R. L. KEENEY and K. NAIR, Selecting Nuclear Plant Sites in the Pacific Northwest Using Decision Analysis, in Conflicting Objectives in Decision, Bell, Keeney, Raiffa (Eds), John Wiley & Sons, 1975, p. 298-322, VI (1 a, 3 di, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 b, 10 b). [MR: 459511] [Google Scholar]
R. L. KEENEY and H. RAIFFA, Decision with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, John Wiley & Sons, 1976, IV (1 a, 3 di, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 b, 10 b). [MR: 449476] [Zbl: 0488.90001] [Google Scholar]
R. KHORRAMSHAHGOL and V. MOUSTAKIS, Delphic Hierarchy Process (D.H.P.): a Methodology for Priority Setting Derived from the Delphi Method and Analytic Hierarchy Process, E.J.O.R., n° 37, 1988, p. 347-354, II (1 b, 2 b, 4 a, 8 b). [Zbl: 0652.90065] [Google Scholar]
L. KISS, J.-M. MARTEL and R. NADEAU, ELECCALC, Un D.S.S. pour modéliser les préférences d'un décideur, WP 91-38, F.S.A., Université Laval, 1991, II. (1 a, 3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b, 11 a). [Google Scholar]
A. L. KNOLL and A. ENGELGERG, Weighting Multiple Objectives. The Churchman-Ackoff Technique Revisited, Comput. Oper. Res., 1978, 5, p. 165-177, II (1 ab, 2 a, 3 cf, 4 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 11 a, 15 a). [Google Scholar]
M. KRESS, Approximate Articulation of Preference and Priority Derivation, a Comment, E.J.O.R., 1991, 52, p. 382-383, II (1 a, 3 b, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
W. KRUSKAL, Concepts of Relative Importance, Qüestio, 1984, 8, p. 39-45, I (4 a, 6 a, 8 b). [EuDML: 40026] [Google Scholar]
W. KRUSKAL and R. MAJORS, Concept of Relative Importance in Recent Scientific Literature, Ameri. Statist., 1989, 43, p. 2-6, I (4 a, 6 a, 8 b). [Google Scholar]
E. F. LANE and W. A. VERDINI, Consistency Test for AHP Decision Makers, Decision Sci., 1989, 20, p. 575-590, II (1 a, 3 b, 10 b, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
F. A. LOOTSMA, Modélisation du jugement humain dans l'analyse multicritère au moyen de comparaisons par paires, RAIRO Rech. Oper., 1987, 21, p. 241-257, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 10 b). [EuDML: 104923] [MR: 919159] [Zbl: 0624.90051] [Google Scholar]
B. MARESCHAL, Weights Stability Intervals in Multicriteria Decision Aid, E.J.O.R., n° 33, 1988, p. 54-64, II (4 b, 8 a). [MR: 923639] [Zbl: 0634.90074] [Google Scholar]
J. M. MARTEL and R. NADEAU, Modélisation des préférences révélées avec ELECTRE II: ELECCALC, une approche interactive, Document de Travail, GRADE, Université Laval, Québec, 1988, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b, 11 a). [Google Scholar]
O. R. MEN'SHIKOVA and V. V. PODINOVSKII, Constructing the Preference Relation and the Core in Multicriterion Problems with Inhomogeneous Criteria Ordered by Importance, U.S.S.R. Comput. Math. Phys., 1988, 28, p. 15-22, I. [MR: 945943] [Zbl: 0684.90093] [Google Scholar]
I. MILLET and P. T. HARKER, Globally Effective Questioning in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, E.J.O.R., 1990, 48, p. 88-97, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 15 a). [Google Scholar]
B. MOND and E. E. ROSINGER, Interactive Weights Assessment in Multiple Attribute Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1985, 22, p. 19-25, II (1 a, 3 cj, 4 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b). [MR: 806459] [Zbl: 0569.90051] [Google Scholar]
P. C. MORRIS, Weighting Inconsistent Judgements, Pi Mu Epsilon J., 1979, p. 576-581, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
V. MOUSSEAU, La notion d'importance relative des critères, Mémoire de D.E.A., Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1989, I (1 a, 3 a → f, 4 ab, 5 ab, 6 ab, 10 ab, 12 a, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
R. J. NEWMAN, Differential Weighting in Multiattribute Utility Measurement: When it Should Not and When it Does Make a Difference, Organ. Behav. Hum Perf., 1977, 20, p. 312-325, III (1 a, 3 fj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 16 ac). [Google Scholar]
D. M. NOWLAN, The Use of Criteria Weights in Rank Ordering Techniques of Project Evaluation, Urban Stud., 1975, 12, p. 169-176. [Google Scholar]
P. C. NUTT, Comparing Methods for Weighting Decision Criteria, Omega, 1980, 8, p. 163-172, III (1 b, 2 a, 3 aj, 4 a, 6 a, 8 ab, 10 ab, 16 cd). [Google Scholar]
J. H. P. PAELINCK, QUALIFLEX: A Flexible Multiple-Criteria Decision Method, Economic Lett., 1978, 1, p. 193-197, II (1 a, 3 f, 4 b). [Google Scholar]
C. PASCHE, Une approche de l'analyse multicritère par les systèmes experts, Cah. C.E.R.O., 1987, 29, p. 49-60, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a). [Zbl: 0624.90050] [Google Scholar]
C. PASCHE, EXTRA: An Expert System for Multicriteria Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1991, 52, p. 224-234, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a). [Zbl: 0725.90048] [Google Scholar]
H. PASTIJN and J. LEYSEN, Constructing an Outranking Relation with ORESTE, Math. Comput. Modelling, 1989, 12, p. 1255-1268, II (1 a, 3 f). [Google Scholar]
J. W. PAYNES, Contingent Decision Behavior, Psychol. Bull., 1982, 92, p. 382-402, V. [Google Scholar]
D. PEKELMAN and K. SEN, Mathematical Programming Models for the Determination of Attribute Weights, Management Sci., 1974, 20, p. 1217-1231, II (1 a, 3 g, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). [Zbl: 0303.90006] [Google Scholar]
V. V. PODINOVSKII, Multicriterial Problems with Importance-Ordered Criteria, traduit de Avtom. Telemekh., n° 11, 1976, p. 118-127, I. [MR: 443852] [Zbl: 0369.90004] [Google Scholar]
V. V. PODINOVSKII, Importance Coefficients of Criteria in Decision-Making Problems. Serial or Ordinal Coefficients, traduit de Avtom. Telemekh., n° 10, 1978, p. 130-142, I. [MR: 533373] [Zbl: 0419.90004] [Google Scholar]
V. V. PODINOVSKII, Criteria Importance Theory in Lewandowiski, Volkovich Eds. Multiobjective Problems of Mathematical Programming, Proceedings, Yalta, U.S.S.R., Springer-Verlag, 1988, I. [MR: 1121512] [Zbl: 0825.90006] [Google Scholar]
J. R. RAO and N. ROY, Fuzzy Set Theoretic Approach of Assigning Weights to Objectives in Multicriteria Decision Making, Int. J. Systems Sci., 1989, 20, p. 1381-1386, II. [MR: 1005682] [Zbl: 0679.90079] [Google Scholar]
E. E. ROSINGER, Beyond Preference Information Based Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Makng, E.J.O.R., 1991, 53, p. 217-227, I. [Zbl: 0732.90044] [Google Scholar]
M. ROUBENS, Preference Relations on Actions and Criteria in Multicriteria Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1982, 10, p. 51-55, II. [Zbl: 0481.90080] [Google Scholar]
B. ROY, Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision, Economica, 1985, IV. [Google Scholar]
B. ROY, Decision Science or Decision-Aid Science, E.J.O.R., 1992 a (à paraître),IV (5 ab, 6 ab). [Google Scholar]
B. ROY, Concerning the Notion of Importance of Criteria: lts Formai Integration into Multi-Criteria Decision Aid, J. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Wiley, 1992 b (à paraître), I. [Google Scholar]
B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Comparison of Two Decision Aid Models Applied to a Nuclear Power Plant Siting Example, E.J.O.R., 1986, 25, p. 200-215, III. [Google Scholar]
B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Conflits entre critères et procédures d'agrégation multicritère, Document du LAMSADE n° 41, Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1987 a, IV. [Google Scholar]
B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Procédures d'agrégation multicritère conduisant à un critère unique de synthèse, Document du LAMSADE n° 42, Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1987 b, IV. [Google Scholar]
B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Procédures d'agrégation multicritère non fondées sur un critère unique de synthèse, Document du LAMSADE n° 68, Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1991, IV. [Google Scholar]
B. ROY and M. PRÉSENT and D. SILHOL, A Programming Method for Determining which Paris Metro Station Should Be Renovated, E.J.O.R., 1986, 24, p. 318-334, VI (3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 10 b). [Google Scholar]
T. L. SAATY, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, Mac Graw Hill, New York, 1980, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a). [MR: 773297] [Zbl: 0587.90002] [Google Scholar]
T. L. SAATY, Décider face à la complexité: une approche analytique multi-critère d'aide à la décision, Entreprise Moderne d'Édition, Collection Université-Entreprise, 1984, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a). [Google Scholar]
T. L. SAATY, Axiomatic Foundatin of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Sci., 1986, 32, p. 841-855, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a). [MR: 846562] [Zbl: 0596.90003] [Google Scholar]
T. L. SAATY, An Exposition of the A.H.P. in Reply to the Paper, Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Sci., 1989, 36, p. 259-268, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). [MR: 1042928] [Google Scholar]
T. L. SAATY, L. G. VARGAS and R. E. WENDELL, Assessing Attribute Weights by Ratio, OMEGA, 1983, 11, p. 9-13, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
Y. SAYEKI, Allocation of Importance: an Axiom System, J. Math. Psych., 1972, 9, p. 55-56, I. [MR: 321563] [Zbl: 0233.92009] [Google Scholar]
Y. SAYEKI and K. H. VESPER, Allocation of Importance in a Hierarchical Goal Structure, Management Sci., 1973, 19, p. 667-675, I. [Zbl: 0233.92009] [Google Scholar]
S. SCHENKERMAN, Use and Abuse of Weights in Multiple Objective Decision Support Models, Decision Sci., 1991, 22, p. 369-378, I. [Google Scholar]
R. J. SCHMITT, Comparison of Subjective and Objective Weighting Strategies in Changing Task Situatins, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1978, 21, p. 171-188, III. [Google Scholar]
R. J. SCHMITT and R. L. LEVINE, Statistical and Subjective Weights: some Problems and Proposals, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1977, 20, p. 15-20, V. [Google Scholar]
P. J. H. SCHOEMAKER and C. C. WAID, An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determing Weights in Additive Utility Models, Management Sci., 1982, 28, p. 188-196, III (1 a, 3 aj, 4 a, 7 a, 10 ab, 16 bc). [Google Scholar]
B. SCHONER and W. C. WEDLEY, Alternative Scales in A.H.P., in LOCKETT and ISLEI (eds.), Improving Decision Making in Organization, Proceedings, Manchester, Springer-Verlag, 1988, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 10 b, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
B. SHONER and W. C. WEDLEY, Ambiguous Criteria Weights in AHP: Consequences and Solutions, Decision Sci., 1989, 20, p. 462-475, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
J. SHANTEAU, The Concept of Weight in Judgment and Decision Making: a Review and Some Unifying Proposais, Report n° 228, Center of Research on Judgment and Policy, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, 1980, I [Google Scholar]
H. D. SHERALI, Equivalent Weights for Lexicographic Multi-Objective Programs: Characterizations and Computations, E.J.O.R., n° 11, 1982, p. 367-379. [MR: 687445] [Zbl: 0494.90071] [Google Scholar]
J. P. SHIM, Bibliographical Research on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (A.H.P.), Soc. Econ. Plann. Sci., 1989, 23, p. 161-167. [Google Scholar]
P. SLOVIC, Choice Between Equally Valued Alternative, J. Exp. Psychol. Human, 1975, 1, p. 280-287, V. [Google Scholar]
P. SLOVIC, B. FISCHHOFF and S. LICHTENSTEIN, The Frame one Adopts Affects Attitudes Towards Risk, in R. M. HOGARTH (ed.), Question Framing and Response Consistency, New Direction for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, n° 11, 1981, Jossey-Bass Publishers, V. [Google Scholar]
P. SLOVIC and S. LICHENTSTEIN, Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgment, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1971, 6, p. 649-744, V. [Google Scholar]
P. SLOVIC and S. LICHTENSTEIN, Preference Reversals: a Broader Perspective, Amer. Econ. Rev., 1983, 73, p. 596-605, V. [Google Scholar]
T. SOLYMOSI and J. DOMBI, A method for Determining the Weights of Criteria: the Centralized Weights, E.J.O.R., 1986, 26, p. 35-41, II (1 a, 3 c, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b). [MR: 846078] [Google Scholar]
E. S. SOOFI, Generalized Entropy-Based Weights for Multiattribute Value Models, Oper, Res., 1990, 38, p. 362-363, II (4 a, 6 a, 14 a). [Zbl: 0705.90001] [Google Scholar]
V. SRINIVASAN and A. D. SHOCKER, Estimating the Weights for Multiple Attributes in a Composite Criterion Using Pairwise Judgments, Psychometrika, 1973 a, 38, p. 473-493, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). [MR: 343475] [Zbl: 0281.62075] [Google Scholar]
V. SRINIVASAN and A. D. SHOCKER Linear Programming Techniques for Multidimensional Analysis of Preferences, Psychometrika, 1973 b, 38, p. 337-369, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). [MR: 418395] [Zbl: 0316.92024] [Google Scholar]
W. G. STILLWELL, D. A. SEAVER and W. EDWARDS, A Comparison of Weight Approximation Techniques in Mutliattribute Utility Decision Making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1981, 28, p. 62-77, III (3 f, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 acd). [Google Scholar]
W. G. STILLWELL, D. Von WINTERFELDT and R. S. JOHN, Comparing Hierarchical and Nonhierarchical Weighting Methods for Eliciting Multitattribute Value Models, Management Sci., 1987, 33, p. 442-450, III (1 a, 3 j, 16 bc). [Google Scholar]
O. SVENSON, Process Description of Decision Making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1979, 23, p. 83-112, V. [Google Scholar]
E. TAKEDA, K. O. COGGER and P. L. YU, Estimating Criterion Weights Using Eigenvectors: a Comparative Study, E.J.O.R., 1987, 29, p.360-369, III (3 b, 4 a, 10 b, 16 c). [MR: 891318] [Zbl: 0618.90046] [Google Scholar]
E. TAKEDA, P. L. YU and K. O. COGGER, A Comparative Study of Eigen Weight Vectors, Decision Making With Multiple Objective, Proceedings, Cleveland, Ohio, 1984, p. 388-399, III (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 10 b). [Zbl: 0558.90051] [Google Scholar]
B. TELL, A Comparative Study of Four Multiple Criteria Methods, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Jouy-en-Josas, France, Springer-Verlag, ed. Thiriez-Zionts, 1975, p. 183-197. III. (1 a, 3 di, 8 a, 10 a, 16 c). [Zbl: 0336.90004] [Google Scholar]
A. TVERSKY, On the Elicitation of Preferences: Descriptive and Prescriptive Considerations, in Bell, Keeney, Raiffa (eds.), Conflicting Objectives in Decisions, J. Wiler, 1977. [Google Scholar]
A. TVERSKY and D. KAHNEMAN, Choices are Affected by the Way in Which Decisions are Framed, in R. M. HOGARTH (ed.), Question Framing and Response Consistency, New Direction for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, n°11, 1981, Jossey- Bass Publishers, V. [Zbl: 1225.91017] [MR: 607666] [Google Scholar]
A. TVERSKY, S. SATTAH and P. SLOVIC, Contingent Weighting in Judgement and Choice, Psychol. Rev., 1988, 95, p. 371-395, V. [Google Scholar]
A. TVERSKY, P. SLOVIC and D. KAHNEMAN, Causes of Preference Reversal, American Econ. Rev., 1990, 80, p. 204-216, V. [Google Scholar]
L. VALADARES TAVARES, The TRIDENT Approach to Rank Alternative Tenders for Large Engeneering Projects, Found. Control Engng., 1984, 9, p. 181-191, II. (1 a, 3 a, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b, 11 a). [Zbl: 0595.90046] [Google Scholar]
D. VANDERPOOTEN, The Use of Preference Information in Multiple Criteria Interactive Procedures, in Improving Decision Making in Organisations, A. G. LOCKET and G. ISLEY (eds.), Proceedings, Machester, 1988, Springer-Verlag, I [Zbl: 0961.90040] [Google Scholar]
J.-C. VANSNICK, Strength of Preference Theoretical and Practical Aspects, Operational Research'84, J. P. BRANS ed., Elsevier, 1984, IV. [Zbl: 0571.90041] [Google Scholar]
J.-C. VANSNICK, On the Problem of Weight in Multiple Criteria Decision Making (The Non Compensatory Approach), E.J.O.R., n° 24, 1986, p. 288-294, IV (6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 12a). [MR: 827240] [Zbl: 0579.90059] [Google Scholar]
J.-C. VANSNICK, Principes et applications des méthodes multicritères, Document de l'Université de l'État à Mons, 1989, IV. [Google Scholar]
J.-C. VANSNICK, Measurement Theory and Decision Aid, in Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, C. BANA e COSTA ed., Springer Verlag, 1990, p. 81-101, IV. [Google Scholar]
M. VIELI, Une expérience en matière de pondération des critères, Document de Travail (non publié), Université de Fribourg, Suisse, 1984, III (1 a, 3 j, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 a, 16 c). [Google Scholar]
R. Von NITZSCH and M. WEBER, The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattributer Utility Measurements, W.P., R.W.T.H. Aachen., 1990, V. [Zbl: 0800.90071] [Google Scholar]
D. Von WINTERFELDT and W. EDWARDS, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge University Press., 1986, V. [Google Scholar]
H. WAINER, Estimating Coefficients in Linear Models: It Don't Make No Nervermind, Psychol. Bull., 1976, 83, p. 213-217, III (16 ab). [Google Scholar]
S. R. WATSON and A. FREELING, Comment on: Assessing Weights by Ratios, Omega, 1983, 11, p. 13-14, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). [Google Scholar]
E. U. WEBER and O. COSKUNOGLU, Descriptive and Prescriptive Models of Decision Making: Implications for the Development of Decision Aids, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man Cybernet., 1990, 20, p. 310-317. [Google Scholar]
M. WEBER, F. EISENFÜHR and D. Von WINTERFELD, The Effects of Splitting Attributes on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurement, Management Sci., 1988, 34, p. 431-445, V. [Google Scholar]
R. R. YAGER, On Ordered Weighted Averaging Aggregation Operators in Multicriteria Decision Making, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man Cybernet., 1988, 18, p. 183-190, IV (13 a). [MR: 931863] [Zbl: 0637.90057] [Google Scholar]
F. ZAHEDI, The Analytic Heirarchy Process, a Survey of the Method and its Applications, Interfaces, 1986, 16, p. 96-108, II. [Google Scholar]
M. S. ZAHIR, Incorporating the Uncertainty of Decision Judgements in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, E.J.O.R., 1991, 53, p. 206-216, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 15 a). [Zbl: 0729.90589] [Google Scholar]
M. ZELENY, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Chap. 7, Mac Graw Hill, 1982, I (14 a). [Zbl: 0588.90019] [Google Scholar]
S. H. ZHU and N. H. ANDERSON, Self-Estimation of Weight Parameter in Multiattribute Analysis, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Proc., 1991, 48, p. 36-54, III (1 a, 3 adj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 a). [Google Scholar]