Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
A key component of multi-criteria decision analysis is the estimation of criteria weights, reflecting the preference strength of different stakeholder groups related to different objectives. One common method is the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). A key challenge with the AHP is the potential for inconsistency in responses, resulting in potentially unreliable preference weights. In small groups, interactions between analysts and respondents can compensate for this through reassessment of inconsistent responses. In many cases, however, stakeholders may be geographically dispersed, with online surveys being a more cost-effective means to elicit these preferences, making renegotiating with inconsistent respondents impossible. Further, the potentially large number of bivariate comparisons required using the AHP may adversely affect response rates. In this study, we test a new “modified” AHP (MAHP). The MAHP was designed to retain the key desirable features of the AHP but be more amenable to online surveys, reduce the problem of inconsistencies, and require substantially fewer comparisons. The MAHP is tested using three groups of university students through an online survey platform, along with a “traditional” AHP approach. The results indicate that the MAHP can provide statistically equivalent outcomes to the AHP but without problems arising due to inconsistencies.
Pascoe et al. (Thu,) studied this question.