I studied a lot of papers on methods and techniques in multi-criteria decision-analysis (MCDA). Most of these approaches are presented as objective methods, which are assisted for an expert or a decision-maker. If we have a one criterion, that kind of problem can be objective, e.g., the following problem: which car consumed more petrol. If we have more than one criterion, the expert must use his/her knowledges, experiences, feelings and opinions. Therefore, the expert cannot be objective in complex problems. Why?
Because we can found definitions of two words (objective and subjective )in the oxford dictionary.
"objective - not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts"
"subjective - based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions"
If a one MCDA method is objective, why it give us the two different result for two different experts? Maybe, the results are subjective, what will be the simplest answer.
Comments are welcome.
objectivity of experts should be dependent on evidence. Unless there are an evidence seen by the expert, s/he cannot be absolutely objective.
As you said that most of the approaches of the papers on methods and techniques in multi-criteria decision-analysis (MCDA) are presented as objective methods, which are assisted for an expert or a decision-maker. But the approaches of other papers may be relatively objective.
It is true none even expert can be 100% objective. Objectivity is figment of imagination. Some values recorded by an apparatus can be differently interpreted depending on the ideology/culture/political orientation and beliefs in a particular research paradigm. However, apparatus will never give two different readings to two different researchers. In this sense your question is interesting and unique. "If a one MCDA method is objective, why it give us the two different result for two different experts?" This needs investigation in the proper use of the method and the way data have been fed or before analysis were not manipulated.
Thank you for your comment. Your opinion is very precious to me. Additionally, I want clarify my comment on complex problems (with more than one criterion). The expert must use his experiences, opinions and knowledge to solve complex problems.
Let's suppose that we have two experts. They must estimate the interval value of the house. They can give us similar results, e.g, the first expert [$100,000; $120,000] and the second expert [$110,000; $125,000]. However their valuations can be dissimilar in extreme cases, e.g. the first expert [$100,000; $110,000] and the second expert [$120,000; $140,000]. It is possible even when they used these same criterions because they have different experiences, knowledge and ideas. Are they objective experts? I say rather that they are subjective, and there is nothing wrong.
objectivity of experts should be dependent on evidence. Unless there are an evidence seen by the expert, s/he cannot be absolutely objective.
As you said that most of the approaches of the papers on methods and techniques in multi-criteria decision-analysis (MCDA) are presented as objective methods, which are assisted for an expert or a decision-maker. But the approaches of other papers may be relatively objective.
Dear Mahfuz Judeh,
Thank for your comment. I agree with you that objectivity of experts should be dependent on evidence. However, uncertainty is observed commonly in real problems, and we must rely on opinions and intuitions of experts, which are subjective. By the way, I don't know why this word has so negative meaning.
Yes, most of the approaches in multi-criteria decision-analysis (MCDA) are presented as objective methods, but is it true that these all methods are objective? Each method is working on data, but some data are coming from an expert. It is observed commonly in techniques with weights for each criterion.
Let's suppose that we have a small group of three students, s1, s2, s3. Each student is associated with his assessment of two courses, c1, c2. Each assessment is between 0 and 100 points. The simplest and most commonly used method of aggregation of grades is the simple average. A more realistic metric is a weighted average in which each course is associated with its degree of importance. Which of these three students is the best of them? As in the real life, we do not know correct values of weights for both courses. If we use a simple average, we assume that all weights are equal.
(below table with sample weights)
One more time, thank you for your comment, and I'm waiting for more commnets.
Dear Wojciech,
I always associated the exact sciences related people were more objective and concise in their answers, but over time I realized that the more knowledge is stored, the more difficult it is to be objective.
But in my opinion, the more objective I can be more clearly I see things.
Best Regards!
Vanessa
Yes, dear Wojciech. Experts and referees must be objective. They must be fair and their way of thinking must be scientific.
Dear Mahfuz,
You wrote that experts must be objective. I don't agree with this sentence. If we take two experts and we ask their about a specific problem, then very often their opinions are not the same. Which of them is objective? Could you give any example of multi-criteria where an expert is objective?
Best regards WS
Dear @Wojiech, even in SCDA, we have different conclusions fro different experts. Of course, in MCDA such cases will be more present. I am attaching some papers about. The last one is Subjectivity in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis!
http://www.lexjansen.com/nesug/nesug97/posters/brusilov.pdf
http://www.iaia.org/conferences/iaia13/proceedings/Final%20papers%20review%20process%2013/Developing%20practices%20for%20supporting%20EIA%20with%20Multi-Criteria%20Decision%20Analysis.pdf?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
Dear Wojciech and friends, to be honest, I can read the question in 2 ways. First, 'Can an expert be objective?' I think an expert has more knowledge, but the expert is still a human, examining an issue from several angles, and influenced by his own background. So as others have commented, an expert is not always objective.
Another way to look at this question: 'Does an expert have to be objective?' I would think so, because his/ her opinion matters to others. A reviewer's opinion is important to authors like us.
I recently submitted 1 article to my college RnD team for approval. 2 persons read the paper. One person said that the literature review is too long, another person said "ok". It was actually paraphrased from my other previous papers that had been accepted by 2 locally based, international online journals. But I still had to make changes, because of what was said. What do you all think about this? Have we not been caught in such situations?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers