Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Applied Mathematics and Decision Sciences
Volume 2007 (2007), Article ID 20489, 18 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2007/20489
Research Article

A Hybrid Distance-Based Ideal-Seeking Consensus Ranking Model

1Management Department, School of Business, La Salle University, 1900 West Olney Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19141, USA
2Management Department, School of Business La Salle University, 1900 West Olney Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19141, USA

Received 1 December 2006; Revised 11 March 2007; Accepted 23 April 2007

Academic Editor: Mahyar A. Amouzegar

Copyright © 2007 Madjid Tavana et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. C. Borda, “Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin,” in Histoire de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, Année MDCCLXXXI, Paris, France, 1781. View at Google Scholar
  2. A. de Grazia, “Mathematical derivation of an election system,” Isis, vol. 44, pp. 42–51, 1953. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  3. D. Black, “The decisions of a committee using a special majority,” Econometrica, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 245–261, 1948. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  4. K. J. Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values, Cowles Commission Monograph no. 12, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1951. View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  5. L. A. Goodman and H. Markowitz, “Social welfare functions based on individual rankings,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 58, pp. 257–262, 1952. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  6. C. H. Coombs, “Social choice and strength of preference,” in Decision Processes, R. M. Thrall, C. H. Coombs, and R. L. Davis, Eds., pp. 69–86, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1954. View at Google Scholar
  7. W. H. Riker, “Voting and the summation of preferences: an interpretive bibliographic review of selected developments during the last decade,” The American Political Science Review, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 900–911, 1961. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. J. G. Kemeny and J. L. Snell, “Preference ranking: an axiomatic approach,” in Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences, pp. 9–23, Ginn, Boston, Mass, USA, 1962, chapter 2. View at Google Scholar
  9. M. Kendall, Rank Correlation Methods, Hafner, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1962.
  10. K. Inada, “The simple majority decision rule,” Econometrica, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 490–506, 1969. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  11. O. A. Davis, M. H. DeGroot, and M. J. Hinich, “Social preference orderings and majority rule,” Econometrica, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 147–157, 1972. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  12. K. P. Bogart, “Preference structures—I: distances between transitive preference relations,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology, vol. 3, pp. 49–67, 1973. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  13. K. P. Bogart, “Preference structures—II: distances between asymmetric relations,” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 254–262, 1975. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  14. V. J. Bowman and C. S. Colantoni, “Majority rule under transitivity constraints,” Management Science, vol. 19, pp. 1029–1041, 1973. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  15. J. M. Blin and A. B. Whinston, “A note on majority rule under transitivity constraints,” Management Science, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1439–1440, 1974. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  16. R. E. Keesey, Modern Parliamentary Procedure, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Mass, USA, 1974.
  17. G. E. M. Anscombe, “On frustration of the majority by fulfilment of the majority's will,” Analysis, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 161–168, 1976. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. W. D. Cook and L. M. Seiford, “On the Borda-Kendall consensus method for priority ranking problems,” Management Science, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 621–637, 1982. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  19. R. E. Jensen, “Comparison of consensus methods for priority ranking problems,” Decision Sciences, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 195–211, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  20. W. D. Cook and A. L. Saipe, “Committee approach to priority planning: the median ranking method,” Cahiers du Centre d'Études de Recherche Opérationnelle, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 337–351, 1976. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  21. W. D. Cook and L. M. Seiford, “Priority ranking and consensus formation,” Management Science, vol. 24, no. 16, pp. 1721–1732, 1978. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  22. W. D. Cook and M. Kress, “Ordinal ranking with intensity of preference,” Management Science, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 26–32, 1985. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  23. W. D. Cook and M. Kress, Ordinal Information and Preference Structures: Decision Models and Applications, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1992. View at MathSciNet
  24. W. D. Cook, M. Kress, and L. M. Seiford, “A general framework for distance-based consensus in ordinal ranking models,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 392–397, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  25. I. Ali, W. D. Cook, and M. Kress, “Ordinal ranking and intensity of preference: a linear programming approach,” Management Science, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 1642–1647, 1986. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  26. W. D. Cook, B. Golany, M. Kress, M. Penn, and T. Raviv, “Optimal allocation of proposals to reviewers to facilitate effective ranking,” Management Science, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 655–661, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  27. P. Iz and M. T. Jelassi, “An interactive group decision aid for multiobjective problems: an empirical assessment,” Omega, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 595–604, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. J. González-Pachón and C. Romero, “Aggregation of partial ordinal rankings: an interval goal programming approach,” Computers & Operations Research, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 827–834, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. W. D. Cook and M. Kress, “A multiple criteria decision model with ordinal preference data,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 191–198, 1991. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  30. W. D. Cook, J. Doyle, R. Green, and M. Kress, “Multiple criteria modelling and ordinal data: evaluation in terms of subsets of criteria,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 602–609, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  31. C. Muralidharan, N. Anantharaman, and S. G. Deshmukh, “A multi-criteria group decisionmaking model for supplier rating,” The Journal of Supply Chain Management, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 22–33, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  32. L. Valadares Tavares, “A model to support the search for consensus with conflicting rankings: multitrident,” International Transactions in Operational Research, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 107–115, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  33. M. P. Beck and B. W. Lin, “Some heuristics for the consensus ranking problem,” Computers and Operations Research, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 1983. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  34. A. Kengpol and M. Tuominen, “A framework for group decision support systems: an application in the evaluation of information technology for logistics firms,” International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 159–171, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  35. H. S. Lewis and T. W. Butler, “An interactive framework for multi-person, multiobjective decisions,” Decision Sciences, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  36. M. Tavana, D. T. Kennedy, and P. Joglekar, “A group decision support framework for consensus ranking of technical manager candidates,” Omega, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 523–538, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  37. M. Tavana, “Euclid: strategic alternative assessment matrix,” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 75–96, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  38. M. Tavana, “CROSS: a multicriteria group-decision-making model for evaluating and prioritizing advanced-technology projects at NASA,” Interfaces, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 40–56, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  39. M. Matsumoto and T. Nishimura, “Mersenne twister: a 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudo-random number generator,” ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 3–30, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  40. M. G. Kendall, “A new measure of rank correlation,” Biometrika, vol. 30, no. 1-2, pp. 81–93, 1938. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  41. M. S. Schaeffer and E. E. Levitt, “Concerning Kendall's tau, a nonparametric correlation coefficient,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 338–346, 1956. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  42. W. L. Hays, Statistics for the Social Sciences, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 1973. View at MathSciNet
  43. S. Arndt, C. Turvey, and N. C. Andreasen, “Correlating and predicting psychiatric symptom ratings: Spearman's r versus Kendall's tau correlation,” Journal of Psychiatric Research, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 97–104, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  44. E. J. Emond and D. W. Mason, “A new rank correlation coefficient with application to the consensus ranking problem,” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 17–28, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  45. J. C. Nunnally, Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA, 1978.