William C. Wedley

TL;DR: This work discusses 18 estimating methods for deriving preference values from pairwise judgment matrices under a common framework of effectiveness: distance minimization and correctness in error free cases and points out the importance of commensurate scales when aggregating all the columns of a judgment matrix.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify several plausible interpretations of criteria weights and their appropriate roles in different multicriteria decision making models and examine the underlying issues of scale validity, commensurability, criteria importance and rank consistency.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that there is a necessary correspondence between the way in which criteria importance is interpreted and computed and the manner in which the weights of the options under each criterion are normalized.

TL;DR: The authors proposed methods for modeling risk and uncertainty with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and introduced prototypical case studies where risk plays a role in multicriteria decision making, which demonstrate how the AHP can be used to derive relative probabilities, multiple criteria outcome measures, risk criteria, and risk adjustment factors.

TL;DR: The authors found that constructive controversy accounts for 45 per cent of variance of decision success whereas the Vroom-Yetton model accounted for 5 per cent, and that the contribution is provided by constructive discussions of opposing opinions when actually generating the decision.