Why Should Not a Decision Analyst be Content with Only ( $$n-1$$ n - 1 ) Pairwise Comparisons? Echoes from the Literature

Matteo Brunelli ()
Additional contact information
Matteo Brunelli: University of Trento

A chapter in Advances in Best-Worst Method, 2023, pp 33-40 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract More and more often, scholars in the field of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) seem to be overly adverse towards inconsistency. While this has some reasonable justifications, hiding the dirt under the rug, by not even trying to let possible inconsistencies emerge, can have negative effects on the decision process. In other words, there may be some merit in having a decision maker being consistent when he is given the possibility of being inconsistent, but there isn’t any in having a fully consistent decision maker when he cannot be inconsistent. In the latter case, consistency of preferences cannot, by all means, be associated to the reliability of judgements. These concepts are illustrated by taking into account some recently introduced methods whose common inspiration is the Best-Worst Method.

Keywords: Pairwise comparisons; Inconsistency; Preferences (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:lnopch:978-3-031-24816-0_3

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9783031248160

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-24816-0_3

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Lecture Notes in Operations Research from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().