Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Different multi‐attribute decision‐making (MADM) methods often produce different outcomes for selecting or ranking a set of decision alternatives involving multiple attributes. This paper presents a new approach to the selection of compensatory MADM methods for a specific cardinal ranking problem via sensitivity analysis of attribute weights. In line with the context‐dependent concept of informational importance, the approach examines the consistency degree between the relative degree of sensitivity of individual attributes using an MADM method and the relative degree of influence of the corresponding attributes indicated by Shannon’s entropy concept. The approach favors the method that has the highest consistency degree as it best reflects the decision information embedded in the problem data set. An empirical study of a scholarship student selection problem is used to illustrate how the approach can validate the ranking outcome produced by different MADM methods. The empirical study shows that different problem data sets may result in a different method being selected. This approach is particularly applicable to large‐scale cardinal ranking problems where the ranking outcome of different methods differs significantly.
Chung‐Hsing Yeh (Fri,) studied this question.