Contribution of individual judgments toward inconsistency in pairwise comparisons. (English) Zbl 1341.90073

Summary: Pairwise comparison (PC) is a well-established method to assist decision makers in estimating their preferences. In PCs, the acquired judgments are used to construct a PC matrix (PCM) that is used to check whether the inconsistency in judgments is acceptable or requires revision. The use of Consistency Ratio (CR) – a widely used measure for inconsistency – has been widely debated and the literature survey has identified a need for a more appropriate measure. Considering this need, a new measure, termed congruence, is proposed in this paper. The measure is shown to be useful in finding the contribution of individual judgments toward overall inconsistency of a PCM and, therefore, can be used to detect and correct cardinally inconsistent judgments. The proposed measure is applicable to incomplete sets of PC judgments without modification, unlike CR which requires a complete set of PC judgments. To address ordinal inconsistency, another measure termed dissonance, is proposed as a supplement to the congruence measure. The two measures appear useful in detecting both outliers and the phenomenon of consistency deadlock where all judgments equally contribute toward the overall inconsistency.


90B50 Management decision making, including multiple objectives
62J15 Paired and multiple comparisons; multiple testing
Full Text: DOI Link


[1] Aguaron, J.; Moreno-Jimenez, J. M., The geometric consistency index: approximated thresholds, European Journal of Operational Research, 147, 1, 137-145, (2003) · Zbl 1060.90657
[2] Ali, I.; Cook, W. D.; Kress, M., On the minimum violations ranking of a tournament, Management Science, 32, 6, 660-672, (1986) · Zbl 0601.90003
[3] Belton, V.; Gear, T., On a short-coming of saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies, Omega, 11, 3, 228-230, (1983)
[4] Bozóki, S., Fülöp, J. Poesz, A. (2014). On reducing inconsistency of pairwise comparison matrices below an acceptance threshold. Central European Journal of Operations Research, in press. doi: 10.1007/s10100-014-0346-7
[5] Bozóki, S.; Rapcsak, T., On saaty’s and koczkodaj’s inconsistencies of pairwise comparison matrices, Journal of Global Optimization, 42, 2, 157-175, (2008) · Zbl 1177.90205
[6] Cao, D.; Leung, L. C.; Law, J. S., Modifying inconsistent comparison matrix in analytic hierarchy process: A heuristic approach, Decision Support Systems, 44, 4, 944-953, (2008)
[7] Choo, E. U.; Wedley, W. C., A common framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices, Computers & Operations Research, 31, 6, 893-908, (2004) · Zbl 1043.62063
[8] Crawford, G., The geometric mean procedure for estimating the scale of a judgement matrix, Mathematical Modelling, 9, 3-5, 327-334, (1987) · Zbl 0624.62108
[9] Dyer, J. S., Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process, Management Science, 36, 3, 249-258, (1990)
[10] Ergu, D.; Kou, G.; Peng, Y.; Shi, Y., A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP, European Journal of Operational Research, 213, 1, 246-259, (2011) · Zbl 1237.90220
[11] Fedrizzi, M., Distance-based characterization of inconsistency in pairwise comparisons, Advances in Computational Intelligence: Communications in Computer and Information Science, 300, 30-36, (2012) · Zbl 1252.91036
[12] Fedrizzi, M.; Giove, S., Incomplete pairwise comparison and consistency optimization, European Journal of Operational Research, 183, 1, 303-313, (2007) · Zbl 1127.90362
[13] Figueira, J.; Greco, S.; Ehrgott, M., Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys, (2004), Springer
[14] Finan, J. S.; Hurley, W. J., Transitive calibration of the ahp verbal scale, European Journal of Operational Research, 112, 2, 367-372, (1999) · Zbl 0939.91036
[15] Gass, S. I., Tournaments, transitivity and pairwise comparison matrices, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49, 6, 616-624, (1998) · Zbl 1131.90381
[16] Greco, S.; Matarazzo, B.; Slowinski, R., Dominance-based rough set approach to preference learning from pairwise comparisons in case of decision under uncertainty, (Hallermeier, E.; Kruse, R.; Hoffmann, F., Computational intelligence for knowledge-based systems design, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6178, (2010), Springer Berlin Heidelberg), 584-594
[17] Harker, P.; Vargas, L., The theory of ratio scale estimation: saaty’s analytic hierarchy process, Management Science, 33, 11, 1383-1403, (1987)
[18] Harker, P. T., Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process, Mathematical Modelling, 9, 11, 837-848, (1987)
[19] Hartvigsen, D., Representing the strengths and directions of pairwise comparisons, European Journal of Operational Research, 163, 2, 357-369, (2005) · Zbl 1071.90548
[20] Herman, M.; Koczkodaj, W., A Monte Carlo study of pairwise comparison, Information Processing Letters, 57, 1, 25-29, (1996) · Zbl 1004.68550
[21] Holsztynski, W.; Koczkodaj, W. W., Convergence of inconsistency algorithms for the pairwise comparisons, Information Processing Letters, 59, 4, 197-202, (1996) · Zbl 0875.68472
[22] Ishizaka, A.; Balkenborg, D.; Kaplan, T., Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62, 700-710, (2011)
[23] Ishizaka, A.; Lusti, M., How to derive priorities in AHP: A comparative study, Central European Journal of Operations Research, 14, 4, 387-400, (2006) · Zbl 1122.90367
[24] Jensen, R. E.; Hicks, T. E., Ordinal data AHP analysis: A proposed coefficient of consistency and a nonparametric test, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 17, 4-5, 135-150, (1993) · Zbl 0800.62754
[25] Kendall, M. G., Further contributions to the theory of paired comparisons, Biometrics, 11, 1, 43-62, (1955)
[26] Kendall, M. G.; Smith, B. B., On the method of paired comparisons, Biometrika, 31, 3/4, 324-345, (1940) · Zbl 0023.14803
[27] Koczkodaj, W., Testing the accuracy enhancement of pairwise comparisons by a Monte Carlo experiment, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 69, 1, 21-31, (1998) · Zbl 0926.62055
[28] Koczkodaj, W. W., A new definition of consistency of pairwise comparisons, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 18, 7, 79-84, (1993) · Zbl 0804.92029
[29] Koczkodaj, W. W.; Szarek, S. J., On distance-based inconsistency reduction algorithms for pairwise comparisons, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 18, 6, 859-869, (2010) · Zbl 1201.68114
[30] Krantz, D. H., Measurement structures and psychological laws, Science, 175, 4029, 1427-1435, (1972)
[31] Lipovetsky, S.; Conklin, W. M., Robust estimation of priorities in the AHP, European Journal of Operational Research, 137, 1, 110-122, (2002) · Zbl 1009.90059
[32] Lootsma, F. A., Scale sensitivity in the multiplicative ahp and smart, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 2, 2, 87-110, (1993) · Zbl 0838.90009
[33] Monsuur, H., An intrinsic consistency threshold for reciprocal matrices, European Journal of Operational Research, 96, 2, 387-391, (1997) · Zbl 0917.90012
[34] Murphy, C. K., Limits on the analytic hierarchy process from its consistency index, European Journal of Operational Research, 65, 1, 138-139, (1993) · Zbl 0775.90009
[35] Saaty, T., The analytic hierarchy process, planning, priority Setting, resource allocation, (1980), McGraw-Hill New York · Zbl 0587.90002
[36] Saaty, T., Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the AHP, (1994), RWS Publications Pittsburgh, PA
[37] Saaty, T. L., A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 3, 234-281, (1977) · Zbl 0372.62084
[38] Saaty, T. L., Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making. why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors—the analytic hierarchy/network process, RACSAM—Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matematicas, 102, 2, 251-318, (2008) · Zbl 1177.62009
[39] Salo, A. A.; Hamalainen, R. P., On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 6, 6, 309-319, (1997) · Zbl 1078.91525
[40] Seaman, M. A.; Levin, J. R.; Serlin, R. C., New developments in pairwise multiple comparisons: Some powerful and practicable procedures, Vol. 110, (1991), Psychological Bulletin
[41] Siraj, S.; Mikhailov, L.; Keane, J. A., A heuristic method to rectify intransitive judgments in pairwise comparison matrices, European Journal of Operational Research, 216, 2, 420-428, (2012) · Zbl 1237.90121
[42] Siskos, Y.; Grigoroudis, E.; Matsatsinis, N., Uta methods, Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys, Vol. 78, International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, 297-334, (2005), Springer New York · Zbl 1072.90547
[43] Stein, W. E.; Mizzi, P. J., The harmonic consistency index for the analytic hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research, 177, 1, 488-497, (2007) · Zbl 1111.90057
[44] Stevens, S., Toward a resolution of the fechner-thurstone legacy, Psychometrika, 26, 1, 35-47, (1961)
[45] Sugden, R., Why be consistent? A critical analysis of consistency requirements in choice theory, Economica, 52, 206, 167-183, (1985)
[46] Thurstone, L. L., A law of comparative judgment, Psychological Review, 34, 4, 273, (1927)
[47] Vaidya, O.; Agarwal, S., Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 169, 1, 1-29, (2006) · Zbl 1077.90542
[48] Vargas, L., An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 1, 2-8, (1990)
[49] Zeshui, X.; Cuiping, W., A consistency improving method in the analytic hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research, 116, 2, 443-449, (1999) · Zbl 1009.90513
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.