Ranking the quality of life indexes by years in Asian countries using multi-criteria decision-making methods

dc.contributor.authorÇelebi Demirarslan, Pınar
dc.contributor.authorSönmez Çakır, Fatma
dc.contributor.authorAkansel, İlkben
dc.contributor.authorDemirarslan, Pınar Çelebi
dc.contributor.authorAkansel, İlkben
dc.contributor.authorÇakır, Fatma Sönmez
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-18T09:58:51Z
dc.date.created2024
dc.date.issued2024
dc.departmentFakülteler, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İktisat Bölümü
dc.departmentFakülteler, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri Bölümü
dc.description.abstractThe objective weighting methods recently introduced in the literature include method based on the removal effects of criteria (MEREC), logarithmic percentage change-driven objective weighting (LOPCOW), and modified preference selection index method (MPSI). The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of the above methods on criteria weights and rank in decision problems involving over 20 alternatives. Based on the quality of life index (QLI), the ranking of Asian countries was carried out by combining the above weighting methods with the multi-attributive ideal-real comparative analysis (MAIRCA). Combination of these methods has not been used before in this research area. Capitals of Asian countries were selected and evaluated with eight different criteria. MEREC, LOPCOW, and MPSI methods were used to weight the criteria. The MAIRCA method was used to rank the alternatives. These results were compared with Numbeo rankings. The MPSI method showed the closest ranking to the Numbeo ranking, exhibiting the highest Spearman rank correlation and lowest Euclidean distance. Given its straightforward applicability, the MPSI method is preferred among the aforementioned objective weighting methods, followed by the MEREC and then the LOPCOW methods. In addition, we also examined the applicability of the preference selection index (PSI) method to the data sets. The results indicate the PSI method may not calculate the criteria weights in decision-making problems where the number of alternatives is high.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s41685-024-00350-w
dc.identifier.endpage942
dc.identifier.issn2509-7946
dc.identifier.issn2509-7954
dc.identifier.issue3
dc.identifier.orcidSONMEZ CAKIR, FATMA/0000-0001-5845-9162;
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85200940751
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage911
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s41685-024-00350-w
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11772/19904
dc.identifier.volume8
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001288360600001
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringernature
dc.relation.ispartofAsia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzWoS_20251016
dc.subjectLopcow
dc.subjectMairca
dc.subjectMcdm
dc.subjectMerec
dc.subjectMpsi
dc.subjectQuality Of Life Index
dc.subjectRanking
dc.titleRanking the quality of life indexes by years in Asian countries using multi-criteria decision-making methods
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication3cea2d91-f3d6-4aa2-bb69-74171fc63a65
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationb16f48ec-f724-4070-bb4d-111df48f92e0
relation.isAuthorOfPublication0e78bbb8-9f10-476f-834e-e64b51830243
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery3cea2d91-f3d6-4aa2-bb69-74171fc63a65

Dosyalar