Abstract
In a recent paper by Bana e Costa and Vansnick [C.A. Bana e Costa, J.C. Vansnick, A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP, European Journal of Operational Research 187 (3) (2008) 1422–1428], analytic hierarchy process (AHP), particularly its eigenvector method (EM) used for deriving priorities from pairwise comparison matrices, was criticized for the violation of a so-called condition of order preservation (COP). Due to this violation, the EM was considered to have a serious fundamental weakness which makes the use of AHP as a decision support tool very problematic. The consistency ratio (CR) index in the AHP was also criticized for its failure to act as an alert of this violation of COP. In this paper, we look into decision makers’ overall judgments which can be obtained through the aggregation of their direct and indirect judgments and then re-examine Bana e Costa and Vansnick’s numerical examples with a detailed analysis to show the invalidity of their criticisms.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
