4.5 Article

A Modified CRITIC Method to Estimate the Objective Weights of Decision Criteria

Journal

SYMMETRY-BASEL
Volume 13, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/sym13060973

Keywords

CRITIC; D-CRITIC; distance correlation; multi-criteria decision-making

Funding

  1. Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia [RACER26-2019]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed the D-CRITIC method, which was validated to produce more valid criteria weights and ranks through distance correlation testing, and was found to be more stable with a larger decision matrix.
In this study, we developed a modified version of the CRiteria Importance Through Inter-criteria Correlation (CRITIC) method, namely the Distance Correlation-based CRITIC (D-CRITIC) method. The usage of the method was illustrated by evaluating the weights of five smartphone criteria. The same evaluation was repeated using four other objective weighting methods, including the original CRITIC method. The results from all the methods were further analyzed based on three different tests (i.e., the distance correlation test, the Spearman rank-order correlation test, and the symmetric mean absolute percentage error test) to validate D-CRITIC. The tests revealed that D-CRITIC could produce more valid criteria weights and ranks than the original CRITIC method since D-CRITIC yielded a higher average distance correlation, a higher average Spearman rank-order correlation, and a lower symmetric mean absolute percentage error. Besides, additional sensitivity analysis indicated that D-CRITIC has the tendency to deliver more stable criteria weights and ranks with a larger decision matrix. The research has contributed an alternative objective weighting method to the area of multi-criteria decision-making through a unique extension of distance correlation. This study is also the first to propose the idea of a distance correlation test to compare the performance of different criteria weighting methods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available