Analyse et classification de la littérature traitant de l'importance relative des critères en aide multicritère à la décision

 Access to full text

 Full (PDF)

1. L. ADELMAN, P. J. STICHA and M. L. DONNELL, The Rôle of Task Properties in Determining the Relative Effectiveness of Weighting Techniques, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1984, 33, p. 243-262, III (1 ab, 3 bij, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 c). 
2. L. ADELMAN, P. J. STICHA and M. L. DONNELL, An Experimental Investigation of the Relative Effectiveness of Two Techniques for Structuring Multiattributed Hierarchies, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Proc., 1986, 37, p. 188-196, III. 
3. J. P. ANCOT, Micro-Qualiflex, an Interactive Software Package for the Determination and Analysis of the Optimal Solution to Decision Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, 1988, II. 
4. A. ARBEL, Approximate Articulation of Preference and Priority Derivation, E.J.O.R., 1989, 43, p. 317-326. II (1 a, 3 b, 8 b, 10 b, 15 b). Zbl0697.90003MR1029890
5. C. BANA e COSTA, A Multicriteria Decision Aid Methodology to Deal with Conflictuous Situation on Weight, E.J.O.R., n° 26, 1986, p. 22-34, II (1 c, 3 d, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 b, 10 b, 11 b, 12 b). Zbl0589.90048MR846077
6. C. BANA e COSTA, A Methodology for Sensitivity Analysis in Three-Criteria Problems: a Case Study in Municipal Management, E.J.O.R., n° 33, 1988, p. 159-173, II (3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b). 
7. C. BANA e COSTA, Une méthode pour l'aide à la décision en situations multicritères et multiacteurs, Université de Paris Dauphine, Document du LAMSADE n° 59, 1989, II ( l c , 3 d, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 8 a , 9 b, 10 b, 11 b, 12 b). 
8. H. BARRON and C. P. SCHMIDT, Entropy Based Selection with Multiple Objectives, Nav. Res. Logist., 1988 a, 35, p. 643-654. Zbl0661.90086MR981195
9. H. BARRON and C. P. SCHMIDT, Sensitivity Analysis of Additive Multi-Attribute Value Models, Oper. Res., 1988 b, 36, p. 122-127, II. 
10. J. BARZILAI, W. D. COOK and B. GOLANY, Consistent Weights for Judgements Matrices of the Relative Importance of Alternatives, Oper. Res. Letters, 1987, 6, p. 131-134, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 a, 10 b, 15 b). Zbl0622.90004MR904836
11. J. BARZILAI and B. GOLANY, Deriving Weights from Pairwise Comparison Matrices: the Additive Case, Oper. Res. Letters, 1990, 9, p. 407-410, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 a, 10 b, 15 b). Zbl0711.90007
12. D. I. BATISHEV, V. F. ANUCHIN and D.E. SHAPOSHNIKOV, The Use of the Qualitative Information on the Importance of Particular Criteria for the Computation of Weighting Coefficients in Lewandowski, Volkovich Eds. Multiobjective Problems of Mathematical Programming, Proceedings, Yalta, U.S.S.R., Springer-Verlag, 1988, II (3 b, 4 b, 8 a). Zbl0765.90078
13. V. BELTON, A Comparison of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and a Simple Multiattribute Value Function, EJOR, n° 26, 1986, p. 7-21, III (1 a, 3 abe, 4 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b). MR846076
14. V. BELTON and T. GEAR, On a Short-Coming of Saaty's Method of Analytic Hierarchies, Omega, 1983, p. 228-230, II (1 a, 3 b, 8 b, 10 b, 15 b). 
15. V. BELTON and T. GEAR, Series of Experiments into the Use of Pairwise Comparison Techniques to Evaluate the Weights, Decision Making with Multiple Objectives, Proceedings, Cleveland, Ohio. Aussi dans V. CHANKONG and Y. Y. HAIMES (eds.), 1983, Decision Making with Multiple Objectives, Springer Verlag, 1984, p.375-385, III (1 a, 3 b, 8 b, 10 b, 16 d). MR872731
16. V. BELTON and S. VICKERS, Use of Simple Multi-Attribute Value Function Incorporating Visual Interactive Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, in Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, edited by C. BANA e COSTA, Springer-Verlag, 1990, II (1 a, 3 fj, 4 a, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a, 11 a). 
17. C. G. E. BOENDER, J. G. De GRAAN and F. A. LOOTSMA, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis with Fuzzy Pairwise Comparisons, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, n° 2, 1989, p. 133-144, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 a, 13 a). Zbl0663.62017MR980343
18. K. BORCHERDING, T. EPPEL and D. Von WINTERFELD, Comparison of Weighting Judgments in Multiattribute Utility Measurement Management Sci., 1991, 37, p. 1603-1619, II (3 dj, 16 cd) Zbl0729.91012
19. D. BOUYSSOU, Approches descriptives et constructives d'aide à la décision, Thèse de 3e cycle, Université de Paris Dauphine, 1984, I (6 ab, 12 a). 
20. D. BOUYSSOU, Some Remarks on the Notion of Compensation in M.C.D.M., E.J.O.R., 1986, 26, p. 150-160, IV (8 a, 12 a). Zbl0598.90057MR846086
21. D. BOUYSSOU and J. C. VANSNICK, Noncompensatory and Generalized Noncompensatory Preference Structures, Theory and Decision, 1986, 21, p. 251-266, IV (8 a, 12 a). Zbl0605.90003MR861114
22. H. D. BRUNK, Mathematical Models for Ranking from Paired Comparison, J. Amer. Statis. Assoc., 1960, 55, p. 503-520, IV. Zbl0101.11902MR115242
23. V. CARAOULI, Indices d'importance relative des critères, W.P. LAMSADE (non publié), 1986, I. (1 a, 3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 b, 10 b, 11 b). 
24. E. U. CHOU and W. WEDLEY, Optimal Criterion Weights in Multicriteria Decision Making, Decision with Multiple Objectives, Proceedings, Cleveland, Ohion, 1984, p. 345-353, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). Zbl0558.90052
25. A. T. W. CHU, R. E. KALABA and K. SPINGARN, A Comparison of two Methods for Determining Weights Belonging to Fuzzy Sets, J. Optim. Theor. Appl., 1979, 27, p. 531-538, III (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b, 15 a, 16 c). Zbl0377.94002MR533119
26. C. W. CHURCHMANN and R. L. ACKOFF, An Approximate Mesure of Value, Oper. Res., 1954, 2, p. 172-187, II (1 a, 3 cf, 4 a, 8 b, 10 a). 
27. C. W. CHURCHMAN, R. L. ACKOFF and E. L. ARNOFF, Introduction to Operations Research (CH. 6: Weighting Objectives), J. Wiley, 1975, New-York, I. Zbl0079.35905MR81815
28. M. CLAESSENS, F. LOOTSMA and F. VOGT, An elementary proof of Paelinck's theorem on the convex hull of ranked criterion weights, E.J.O.R., 1991, 52, p. 258, IV. Zbl0727.90040
29. K. O. COGGER and P. L. YU, Eigenweight Vectors and Least Distance Approximation for Revealed Preference in Pairwise Weight Ratio, J. Optim. Theor. Appl., 1985, 46, p. 483-491, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 5 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b). Zbl0552.90050MR797852
30. R. L. COOK and T. R. STEWART, A Comparison of Seven Methods for Obtaining Subjective Descriptions of Judgemtal Policy, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1975, 13, p. 31-45, III (1 a, 3 bdj, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 ac). 
31. W. D. COOK and M. KRESS, Deriving Weights from Pairwise Comparison Ratio Matrix: an Axiomatic Approach, E.J.O.R., 1988, 37, p. 355-362, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 10 b). Zbl0652.90002MR970400
32. J. P. CRAGIN, The Nature of Importance Perceptions: A Test of a Cognitive Model, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1983, 31, p. 262-276, V. 
33. R. M. DAWES and B. CORRIGAN, Linear Models in Decision Making, Psychol. Bull., 1974, 81, p. 95-106, III (3 aj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 ab). 
34. R. DRUGMAN, Étude sur la signification pour le décideur des poids dans les méthodes multicritères d'aide à la décision, Mémoire de Licence, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1990, I (1 a, 3 dj). 
35. R. T. ECKENRODE, Weighting Multiple Criteria, Management Sci., 1965, 12, p. 180-192, III (1 b, 2 a, 3 bcfj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 a). 
36. W. EDWARDS, How to Use Multiattribute Utility Measurement for Social Decision Making, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man. Cyberne., 1977, 7, p. 326-340, II (1 b, 3 j, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 b, 10 a). 
37. H. J. EINHORN and R. M. HOGARTH, Unit Weighting Schemes for Decision Making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1975, 13, p. 171-192, III (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b, 16 ac). 
38. G. FISCHER, N. DAMODARAN, K. LASKEY and D. LINCOLN, Preferences for Proxy Attributes, Management Sci., 1987, 33, p. 198-214, V. MR905823
39. B. FISCHHOFF, P. SLOVIC and S. LICHTENSTEIN, Knowing What You Want: Measuring Labile Values, in Bell-Raiffa-Tversky: Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative and Prescriptive Interactions, Cambridge University Press, 1989, p.398-421. V. 
40. P. C. FISHBURN, Methods for Estimating Additives Utilities, Management Sci., 1967, 13, p. 435-453, III (1 a, 3 bcdij, 4 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 ab, 10 ab). 
41. P. C. FISHBURN, Lexicographic Orders, Utilities and Decision Rules: a Survey, Management Sci., 1974, 20, p. 1442-1471, IV (3 f, 8 a, 12 a). Zbl0311.90007MR363428
42. P. C. FISHBURN, Noncompensatory Preferences, Syntheses, 1976, 33, p. 393-403, IV (12 a). Zbl0357.90004
43. P. C. FISHBURN, A Survey of Multiattribute/Multicriterion Evaluation Theories, in Multiple Criteria Problem Solving, Proceedings, Buffalo (N. Y.), edited by S. ZIONTS, Springer-Verlag, 1977, p. 181-224, IV. Zbl0387.90005
44. S. I. GASS, The Setting of Weights in Linear Goal Programming Problems, Compters and Oper. Res., 1987, 14, p. 227-229, II (15 b). 
45. A. GBODOSSOU, La notion de poids de critères/attributs en analyse multicritère, une étude empirique, Thèse Ph. D., 1986, Université Laval, I (14 a, 15 b). 
46. M. GERSCHON, The Role of Weights and Scales in the Applications of Multi-Objective Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1984, n° 14, p. 244-250, III (8 a, 15 b). Zbl0537.90054
47. W. M. GOLDSTEIN, Judgments of Relative Importance in Decision Making: Global vs Local Interpretation of Subjective Weights, Organ. Behav. Hum. Des. Proc., 1990, 47, p. 313-336, VI (1 a, 3 ej, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b). 
48. P. T. HARKER, Alternative Modes of Questionning in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Math. Model., 1987, 9, p. 353-360, II (3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 15 b). Zbl0626.90001MR902229
49. R. M. HEELER, C. OKECHUKU and S. REID, Attribute Importance: Contrasting Measurements, J. Marketing Res., 1979, 16, p. 60-93, III (1 a, 3 ej, 4 a, 8 b, 10 ab, 16 c). 
50. J. C. HERSHEY, H. C. KUNREUTHER and P. SCHOEMAKER, Sources of Bias in Assessment Procedures for Utility Fuctions, Management Sci., 1982, 28, n° 8, p. 936-954, V. Zbl0487.90013
51. J. C. HERSHEY and P. SCHOEMAKER, Probability Versus Certainty Equivalence Methods in Utility Measurement: Are They Equivalent?, Management Sci., 1985, 31, p. 1213-1231, V. 
52. B. F. HOBBS, A Comparision of Weighting Methods in Power Plant Siting, Decision Sci., 1980, 11, p. 725-737, III (3 abdefj, 8 a, 10 ab, 16 bc). 
53. R. M. HOGARTH (ed.), Question Framing and Response Consistency, New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, Jossey-Bass, Publichers, 1982, V. 
54. R. D. HOLDER, Somme Comments on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, J. Oper. Res. Soc., 1990, 41, p. 1073-1076, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 15 b). 
55. D. HORSKY and M. R. RAO, Estimation of Attribute Weights from Preference Comparison, Management Sci., 1984, 30, n° 7, p. 801-822, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 10 b, 11 a). Zbl0551.90053MR756954
56. G. P. HUBERT, Multi-Attribute Utility Models: A Review of Field and Field-Like Studies, Management Sci., 1974, 20, p. 1393-1402. Zbl0303.90001
57. J. JACCARD, D. BRINBERG and L. J. ACKERMAN, Assessing Attribute Importance: a Comparison of Six Methods, J. Consum. Res., 1986, 12, p. 463-468, III (1 a, 3 acj, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 ab, 16 c). 
58. E. JACQUET-LAGRÈZE, Binary preference indices: A New Lood on Multicriteria Aggregation Procedures, E.J.O.R., 1982, 10, p. 26-32, IV. Zbl0481.90003MR655495
59. E. JACQUET-LAGRÈZE, PREFCALC: Manuel utilisateur, Euro-Décision, 1983, II (1 a, 3 e, 4 b, 5 b, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a, 11 a). MR655495
60. E. JACQUET-LAGRÈZE and J. SISKOS, Assessing a Set of Additive Utility Functions for Multi criteria Decision-Making, the U.T.A. Method, E.J.O.R., 1982,10, p. 151-164, II (1 a, 3 e, 4 b, 5 b, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 a, 11 a). Zbl0481.90078MR655495
61. A. K. JAIN, F. ACITO, M. K. MALHOTRA and V. MAHAJAN, A Comparison of the Internal Validity of Alternative Parameter Estimation Methods in Decompositional Multiattribute Preference Models, J. Market. Res., 1979, 16, p. 313-322, III (3 a, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 9 b, 10 b, 11 a). 
62. E. M. JOHNSON and G. P. HUBERT , The Technology of Utility Assessment, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man. Cybernet. smc-7, 1977, p. 311-325, III (3 fij, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 ab). 
63. D. KAHNEMAN and A. TVERSKY, Choices, Values and Frames, Amer. Psychol., 1984, 39, p. 341-350, V. 
64. R. D. KAMENETZKY, Relationship Between the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Additive Value Function, Decision Sci., 1982, 13, p. 702-713, III (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 10 b, 15 b). 
65. R. L. KEENEY, An Illustrated Procedure for Assessing Multiattributed Utility Functions, Sloan Manag. Rev., 1972, 14, p. 37-50, VI (4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). 
66. R. L. KEENEY, The Art of Assessing Multi-Attribute Utility Functions, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1977, 19, p. 267-310, VI. 
67. R. L. KEENEY and K. NAIR, Selecting Nuclear Plant Sites in the Pacific Northwest Using Decision Analysis, in Conflicting Objectives in Decision, Bell, Keeney, Raiffa (Eds), John Wiley & Sons, 1975, p. 298-322, VI (1 a, 3 di, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 b, 10 b). MR459511
68. R. L. KEENEY and H. RAIFFA, Decision with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, John Wiley & Sons, 1976, IV (1 a, 3 di, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 b, 10 b). Zbl0488.90001MR449476
69. R. KHORRAMSHAHGOL and V. MOUSTAKIS, Delphic Hierarchy Process (D.H.P.): a Methodology for Priority Setting Derived from the Delphi Method and Analytic Hierarchy Process, E.J.O.R., n° 37, 1988, p. 347-354, II (1 b, 2 b, 4 a, 8 b). Zbl0652.90065
70. L. KISS, J.-M. MARTEL and R. NADEAU, ELECCALC, Un D.S.S. pour modéliser les préférences d'un décideur, WP 91-38, F.S.A., Université Laval, 1991, II. (1 a, 3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b, 11 a). 
71. A. L. KNOLL and A. ENGELGERG, Weighting Multiple Objectives. The Churchman-Ackoff Technique Revisited, Comput. Oper. Res., 1978, 5, p. 165-177, II (1 ab, 2 a, 3 cf, 4 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 11 a, 15 a). 
72. M. KRESS, Approximate Articulation of Preference and Priority Derivation, a Comment, E.J.O.R., 1991, 52, p. 382-383, II (1 a, 3 b, 15 b). 
73. W. KRUSKAL, Concepts of Relative Importance, Qüestio, 1984, 8, p. 39-45, I (4 a, 6 a, 8 b). 
74. W. KRUSKAL and R. MAJORS, Concept of Relative Importance in Recent Scientific Literature, Ameri. Statist., 1989, 43, p. 2-6, I (4 a, 6 a, 8 b). 
75. E. F. LANE and W. A. VERDINI, Consistency Test for AHP Decision Makers, Decision Sci., 1989, 20, p. 575-590, II (1 a, 3 b, 10 b, 15 b). 
76. F. A. LOOTSMA, Modélisation du jugement humain dans l'analyse multicritère au moyen de comparaisons par paires, RAIRO Rech. Oper., 1987, 21, p. 241-257, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 10 b). Zbl0624.90051MR919159
77. B. MARESCHAL, Weights Stability Intervals in Multicriteria Decision Aid, E.J.O.R., n° 33, 1988, p. 54-64, II (4 b, 8 a). Zbl0634.90074MR923639
78. J. M. MARTEL and R. NADEAU, Modélisation des préférences révélées avec ELECTRE II: ELECCALC, une approche interactive, Document de Travail, GRADE, Université Laval, Québec, 1988, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b, 11 a). 
79. O. R. MEN'SHIKOVA and V. V. PODINOVSKII, Constructing the Preference Relation and the Core in Multicriterion Problems with Inhomogeneous Criteria Ordered by Importance, U.S.S.R. Comput. Math. Phys., 1988, 28, p. 15-22, I. Zbl0684.90093MR945943
80. I. MILLET and P. T. HARKER, Globally Effective Questioning in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, E.J.O.R., 1990, 48, p. 88-97, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 15 a). 
81. B. MOND and E. E. ROSINGER, Interactive Weights Assessment in Multiple Attribute Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1985, 22, p. 19-25, II (1 a, 3 cj, 4 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b). Zbl0569.90051MR806459
82. P. C. MORRIS, Weighting Inconsistent Judgements, Pi Mu Epsilon J., 1979, p. 576-581, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 15 b). 
83. V. MOUSSEAU, La notion d'importance relative des critères, Mémoire de D.E.A., Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1989, I (1 a, 3 a → f, 4 ab, 5 ab, 6 ab, 10 ab, 12 a, 15 b). 
84. R. J. NEWMAN, Differential Weighting in Multiattribute Utility Measurement: When it Should Not and When it Does Make a Difference, Organ. Behav. Hum Perf., 1977, 20, p. 312-325, III (1 a, 3 fj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 a, 8 a, 16 ac). 
85. D. M. NOWLAN, The Use of Criteria Weights in Rank Ordering Techniques of Project Evaluation, Urban Stud., 1975, 12, p. 169-176. 
86. P. C. NUTT, Comparing Methods for Weighting Decision Criteria, Omega, 1980, 8, p. 163-172, III (1 b, 2 a, 3 aj, 4 a, 6 a, 8 ab, 10 ab, 16 cd). 
87. J. H. P. PAELINCK, QUALIFLEX: A Flexible Multiple-Criteria Decision Method, Economic Lett., 1978, 1, p. 193-197, II (1 a, 3 f, 4 b). 
88. C. PASCHE, Une approche de l'analyse multicritère par les systèmes experts, Cah. C.E.R.O., 1987, 29, p. 49-60, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a). Zbl0624.90050
89. C. PASCHE, EXTRA: An Expert System for Multicriteria Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1991, 52, p. 224-234, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a). Zbl0725.90048
90. H. PASTIJN and J. LEYSEN, Constructing an Outranking Relation with ORESTE, Math. Comput. Modelling, 1989, 12, p. 1255-1268, II (1 a, 3 f). 
91. J. W. PAYNES, Contingent Decision Behavior, Psychol. Bull., 1982, 92, p. 382-402, V. 
92. D. PEKELMAN and K. SEN, Mathematical Programming Models for the Determination of Attribute Weights, Management Sci., 1974, 20, p. 1217-1231, II (1 a, 3 g, 4 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). Zbl0303.90006
93. V. V. PODINOVSKII, Multicriterial Problems with Importance-Ordered Criteria, traduit de Avtom. Telemekh., n° 11, 1976, p. 118-127, I. Zbl0369.90004MR443852
94. V. V. PODINOVSKII, Importance Coefficients of Criteria in Decision-Making Problems. Serial or Ordinal Coefficients, traduit de Avtom. Telemekh., n° 10, 1978, p. 130-142, I. Zbl0419.90004MR533373
95. V. V. PODINOVSKII, Criteria Importance Theory in Lewandowiski, Volkovich Eds. Multiobjective Problems of Mathematical Programming, Proceedings, Yalta, U.S.S.R., Springer-Verlag, 1988, I. Zbl0825.90006MR1121512
96. J. R. RAO and N. ROY, Fuzzy Set Theoretic Approach of Assigning Weights to Objectives in Multicriteria Decision Making, Int. J. Systems Sci., 1989, 20, p. 1381-1386, II. Zbl0679.90079MR1005682
97. E. E. ROSINGER, Beyond Preference Information Based Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Makng, E.J.O.R., 1991, 53, p. 217-227, I. Zbl0732.90044
98. M. ROUBENS, Preference Relations on Actions and Criteria in Multicriteria Decision Making, E.J.O.R., 1982, 10, p. 51-55, II. Zbl0481.90080
99. B. ROY, Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision, Economica, 1985, IV. 
100. B. ROY, Decision Science or Decision-Aid Science, E.J.O.R., 1992 a (à paraître),IV (5 ab, 6 ab). 
101. B. ROY, Concerning the Notion of Importance of Criteria: lts Formai Integration into Multi-Criteria Decision Aid, J. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Wiley, 1992 b (à paraître), I. 
102. B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Comparison of Two Decision Aid Models Applied to a Nuclear Power Plant Siting Example, E.J.O.R., 1986, 25, p. 200-215, III. 
103. B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Conflits entre critères et procédures d'agrégation multicritère, Document du LAMSADE n° 41, Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1987 a, IV. 
104. B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Procédures d'agrégation multicritère conduisant à un critère unique de synthèse, Document du LAMSADE n° 42, Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1987 b, IV. 
105. B. ROY and D. BOUYSSOU, Procédures d'agrégation multicritère non fondées sur un critère unique de synthèse, Document du LAMSADE n° 68, Université de Paris-Dauphine, 1991, IV. 
106. B. ROY and M. PRÉSENT and D. SILHOL, A Programming Method for Determining which Paris Metro Station Should Be Renovated, E.J.O.R., 1986, 24, p. 318-334, VI (3 a, 4 b, 5 b, 6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 10 b). 
107. T. L. SAATY, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, Mac Graw Hill, New York, 1980, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a). Zbl0587.90002MR773297
108. T. L. SAATY, Décider face à la complexité: une approche analytique multi-critère d'aide à la décision, Entreprise Moderne d'Édition, Collection Université-Entreprise, 1984, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a). 
109. T. L. SAATY, Axiomatic Foundatin of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Sci., 1986, 32, p. 841-855, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a). Zbl0596.90003MR846562
110. T. L. SAATY, An Exposition of the A.H.P. in Reply to the Paper, Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Sci., 1989, 36, p. 259-268, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). MR1042928
111. T. L. SAATY, L. G. VARGAS and R. E. WENDELL, Assessing Attribute Weights by Ratio, OMEGA, 1983, 11, p. 9-13, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). 
112. Y. SAYEKI, Allocation of Importance: an Axiom System, J. Math. Psych., 1972, 9, p. 55-56, I. Zbl0233.92009MR321563
113. Y. SAYEKI and K. H. VESPER, Allocation of Importance in a Hierarchical Goal Structure, Management Sci., 1973, 19, p. 667-675, I. Zbl0233.92009
114. S. SCHENKERMAN, Use and Abuse of Weights in Multiple Objective Decision Support Models, Decision Sci., 1991, 22, p. 369-378, I. 
115. R. J. SCHMITT, Comparison of Subjective and Objective Weighting Strategies in Changing Task Situatins, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1978, 21, p. 171-188, III. 
116. R. J. SCHMITT and R. L. LEVINE, Statistical and Subjective Weights: some Problems and Proposals, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1977, 20, p. 15-20, V. 
117. P. J. H. SCHOEMAKER and C. C. WAID, An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determing Weights in Additive Utility Models, Management Sci., 1982, 28, p. 188-196, III (1 a, 3 aj, 4 a, 7 a, 10 ab, 16 bc). 
118. B. SCHONER and W. C. WEDLEY, Alternative Scales in A.H.P., in LOCKETT and ISLEI (eds.), Improving Decision Making in Organization, Proceedings, Manchester, Springer-Verlag, 1988, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 10 b, 15 b). 
119. B. SHONER and W. C. WEDLEY, Ambiguous Criteria Weights in AHP: Consequences and Solutions, Decision Sci., 1989, 20, p. 462-475, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). 
120. J. SHANTEAU, The Concept of Weight in Judgment and Decision Making: a Review and Some Unifying Proposais, Report n° 228, Center of Research on Judgment and Policy, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, 1980, I 
121. H. D. SHERALI, Equivalent Weights for Lexicographic Multi-Objective Programs: Characterizations and Computations, E.J.O.R., n° 11, 1982, p. 367-379. Zbl0494.90071MR687445
122. J. P. SHIM, Bibliographical Research on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (A.H.P.), Soc. Econ. Plann. Sci., 1989, 23, p. 161-167. 
123. P. SLOVIC, Choice Between Equally Valued Alternative, J. Exp. Psychol. Human, 1975, 1, p. 280-287, V. 
124. P. SLOVIC, B. FISCHHOFF and S. LICHTENSTEIN, The Frame one Adopts Affects Attitudes Towards Risk, in R. M. HOGARTH (ed.), Question Framing and Response Consistency, New Direction for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, n° 11, 1981, Jossey-Bass Publishers, V. 
125. P. SLOVIC and S. LICHENTSTEIN, Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgment, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1971, 6, p. 649-744, V. 
126. P. SLOVIC and S. LICHTENSTEIN, Preference Reversals: a Broader Perspective, Amer. Econ. Rev., 1983, 73, p. 596-605, V. 
127. T. SOLYMOSI and J. DOMBI, A method for Determining the Weights of Criteria: the Centralized Weights, E.J.O.R., 1986, 26, p. 35-41, II (1 a, 3 c, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 7 b, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b). MR846078
128. E. S. SOOFI, Generalized Entropy-Based Weights for Multiattribute Value Models, Oper, Res., 1990, 38, p. 362-363, II (4 a, 6 a, 14 a). Zbl0705.90001
129. V. SRINIVASAN and A. D. SHOCKER, Estimating the Weights for Multiple Attributes in a Composite Criterion Using Pairwise Judgments, Psychometrika, 1973 a, 38, p. 473-493, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). Zbl0281.62075MR343475
130. V. SRINIVASAN and A. D. SHOCKERLinear Programming Techniques for Multidimensional Analysis of Preferences, Psychometrika, 1973 b, 38, p. 337-369, II (1 a, 3 a, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 a, 10 b). Zbl0316.92024MR418395
131. W. G. STILLWELL, D. A. SEAVER and W. EDWARDS, A Comparison of Weight Approximation Techniques in Mutliattribute Utility Decision Making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1981, 28, p. 62-77, III (3 f, 4 a, 6 a, 8 b, 16 acd). 
132. W. G. STILLWELL, D. Von WINTERFELDT and R. S. JOHN, Comparing Hierarchical and Nonhierarchical Weighting Methods for Eliciting Multitattribute Value Models, Management Sci., 1987, 33, p. 442-450, III (1 a, 3 j, 16 bc). 
133. O. SVENSON, Process Description of Decision Making, Organ. Behav. Hum. Perf., 1979, 23, p. 83-112, V. 
134. E. TAKEDA, K. O. COGGER and P. L. YU, Estimating Criterion Weights Using Eigenvectors: a Comparative Study, E.J.O.R., 1987, 29, p.360-369, III (3 b, 4 a, 10 b, 16 c). Zbl0618.90046MR891318
135. E. TAKEDA, P. L. YU and K. O. COGGER, A Comparative Study of Eigen Weight Vectors, Decision Making With Multiple Objective, Proceedings, Cleveland, Ohio, 1984, p. 388-399, III (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 10 b). Zbl0558.90051
136. B. TELL, A Comparative Study of Four Multiple Criteria Methods, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Jouy-en-Josas, France, Springer-Verlag, ed. Thiriez-Zionts, 1975, p. 183-197. III. (1 a, 3 di, 8 a, 10 a, 16 c). Zbl0336.90004
137. A. TVERSKY, On the Elicitation of Preferences: Descriptive and Prescriptive Considerations, in Bell, Keeney, Raiffa (eds.), Conflicting Objectives in Decisions, J. Wiler, 1977. 
138. A. TVERSKY and D. KAHNEMAN, Choices are Affected by the Way in Which Decisions are Framed, in R. M. HOGARTH (ed.), Question Framing and Response Consistency, New Direction for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science, n°11, 1981, Jossey- Bass Publishers, V. Zbl1225.91017MR607666
139. A. TVERSKY, S. SATTAH and P. SLOVIC, Contingent Weighting in Judgement and Choice, Psychol. Rev., 1988, 95, p. 371-395, V. 
140. A. TVERSKY, P. SLOVIC and D. KAHNEMAN, Causes of Preference Reversal, American Econ. Rev., 1990, 80, p. 204-216, V. 
141. L. VALADARES TAVARES, The TRIDENT Approach to Rank Alternative Tenders for Large Engeneering Projects, Found. Control Engng., 1984, 9, p. 181-191, II. (1 a, 3 a, 7 a, 8 a, 9 a, 10 b, 11 a). Zbl0595.90046
142. D. VANDERPOOTEN, The Use of Preference Information in Multiple Criteria Interactive Procedures, in Improving Decision Making in Organisations, A. G. LOCKET and G. ISLEY (eds.), Proceedings, Machester, 1988, Springer-Verlag, I Zbl0961.90040
143. J.-C. VANSNICK, Strength of Preference Theoretical and Practical Aspects, Operational Research'84, J. P. BRANS ed., Elsevier, 1984, IV. Zbl0571.90041
144. J.-C. VANSNICK, On the Problem of Weight in Multiple Criteria Decision Making (The Non Compensatory Approach), E.J.O.R., n° 24, 1986, p. 288-294, IV (6 b, 7 b, 8 a, 12a). Zbl0579.90059MR827240
145. J.-C. VANSNICK, Principes et applications des méthodes multicritères, Document de l'Université de l'État à Mons, 1989, IV. 
146. J.-C. VANSNICK, Measurement Theory and Decision Aid, in Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, C. BANA e COSTA ed., Springer Verlag, 1990, p. 81-101, IV. 
147. M. VIELI, Une expérience en matière de pondération des critères, Document de Travail (non publié), Université de Fribourg, Suisse, 1984, III (1 a, 3 j, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 b, 10 a, 16 c). 
148. R. Von NITZSCH and M. WEBER, The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattributer Utility Measurements, W.P., R.W.T.H. Aachen., 1990, V. Zbl0800.90071
149. D. Von WINTERFELDT and W. EDWARDS, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge University Press., 1986, V. 
150. H. WAINER, Estimating Coefficients in Linear Models: It Don't Make No Nervermind, Psychol. Bull., 1976, 83, p. 213-217, III (16 ab). 
151. S. R. WATSON and A. FREELING, Comment on: Assessing Weights by Ratios, Omega, 1983, 11, p. 13-14, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 11 a, 15 b). 
152. E. U. WEBER and O. COSKUNOGLU, Descriptive and Prescriptive Models of Decision Making: Implications for the Development of Decision Aids, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man Cybernet., 1990, 20, p. 310-317. 
153. M. WEBER, F. EISENFÜHR and D. Von WINTERFELD, The Effects of Splitting Attributes on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurement, Management Sci., 1988, 34, p. 431-445, V. 
154. R. R. YAGER, On Ordered Weighted Averaging Aggregation Operators in Multicriteria Decision Making, I.E.E.E. Trans. Systems Man Cybernet., 1988, 18, p. 183-190, IV (13 a). Zbl0637.90057MR931863
155. F. ZAHEDI, The Analytic Heirarchy Process, a Survey of the Method and its Applications, Interfaces, 1986, 16, p. 96-108, II. 
156. M. S. ZAHIR, Incorporating the Uncertainty of Decision Judgements in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, E.J.O.R., 1991, 53, p. 206-216, II (1 a, 3 b, 4 a, 8 b, 10 b, 15 a). Zbl0729.90589
157. M. ZELENY, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Chap. 7, Mac Graw Hill, 1982, I (14 a). Zbl0588.90019
158. S. H. ZHU and N. H. ANDERSON, Self-Estimation of Weight Parameter in Multiattribute Analysis, Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Proc., 1991, 48, p. 36-54, III (1 a, 3 adj, 4 a, 5 a, 6 a, 8 a).