부트스트랩핑을 이용한 가중치 결정방법의 실질적 타당성 비교

Practical Validity of Weighting Methods : A Comparative Analysis Using Bootstrapping

For a weighting method to be practically valid, it should produce weights which coincide with the relative importance of attributes perceived by the decision maker. In this paper, 'bootstrapping' is used to compare the practical validities of five weighting methods frequently used; the rank order centroid method, the rank reciprocal method, the rank sum method, the entropic method, and the geometric mean method. Bootstrapping refers to the procedure where the analysts allow the decision maker to make careful judgements on a series of similar cases, then infer statistically what weights he was implicitly using to arrive at the particular ranking. The weights produced by bootstrapping can therefore be regarded as well reflecting the decision maker's perceived relative importances. Bootstrapping and the five weighting methods were applied to a job selection problem. The results showed that both the rank order centroid method and the rank reciprocal method had higher level of practical validity than the other three methods, though a large difference could not be found either in the resulting weights or in the corresponding solutions.