Bibliometric analysis for fuzzy multiple criteria decision making studies: 2005-2019 period

Year 2020, Volume: 5 Issue: 2, 257 - 272, 30.12.2020

Gözde Koca Seda Yıldırım

https://doi.org/10.33905/bseusbed.787164

Cited By: 3

Abstract

The aim of this study is to review the main contributions of the Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) literature in the WOS (Web Of Science) database published between 2005-2019 using a bibliometric approach. In total, 2482 publications were analyzed using the VOSviewer program. Results; China, Taiwan, Turkey, India and Iran have shown that active in the fuzzy MCDM studies. Wang et al. (2009) and Chen et al. (2006) were identified as the most cited authors among the studies reviewed. When universities are examined in terms of the number of publications, it is seen that Yıldız Technical University, Galatasaray University and Istanbul Technical University are in the top 10. It has been observed that the most remarkable Turkish writers in the top 10 in terms of number of publications are Gülçin Büyüközkan and Cengiz Kahraman. The most common used keywords are MCDM, TOPSIS, AHP, VIKOR, Supplier Selection, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy TOPSIS, Multi-Criteria Decision Making, Fuzzy AHP, Fuzzysets, Fahp, Fuzzy set theory, Fuzzy, etc.. As a result, with its strong potential, it is predicted that this discipline will continue to grow with future expectations.

Keywords

Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Bibliometric Analysis, Web of Science, VOSviewer, MCDM

Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Çalışmalarına Yönelik Bibliyometrik Analiz: 2005-2019 Dönemi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı bibliyometrik bir yaklaşım kullanarak, 2005-2019 yılları arasında yayınlanan ve WOS (Web Of Science) veri tabanında bulunan Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (ÇKKV) literatürünü gözden geçirmektir. Toplamda 2482 yayın VOSviewer programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular; Çin, Tayvan, Türkiye, Hindistan ve İran’ın Bulanık ÇKKV çalışmalarında aktif olduğunu göstermiştir. Wang vd. (2009) ve Chen vd. (2006) en fazla atıfa sahip olan çalışmalar olarak tespit edilmiştir. Yayın sayısı açısından üniversiteler incelendiğinde ilk 10’da Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, Galatasaray Üniversitesi ve İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi’nin yer aldığı görülmüştür. Türkiye’de en dikkat çeken ve aynı zamanda yayın sayısı açısından ilk 10’da yer alan Türk yazarların “Gülçin Büyüközkan” ve “Cengiz Kahraman” olduğu görülmüştür. ÇKKV çalışmalarında en çok yer alan anahtar kelimeler MCDM, TOPSIS, AHP, VIKOR, Supplier Selection, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy TOPSIS, Multi-Criteria Decision Making, Fuzzy AHP, Fuzzy sets, F AHP, Fuzzy set theory, Fuzzy vb. kelimelerdir. Sonuçta, bu disiplinin güçlü bir potansiyelinin olduğu görülmekle birlikte, geleceğe yönelik beklentiler ile büyümeye devam edeceği öngörülmektedir.

Keywords

Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme, Bibliyometrik Analiz, Web of Science, VOSviewer, çkkv

References

• Abu-Taha, R. (2011, July). Multi-criteria applications in renewable energy analysis: A literature review. In 2011 Proceedings of PICMET'11: Technology Management in the Energy Smart World (PICMET) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
• Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). “A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications”, Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 13051-13069.
• Bellman, R. E., & Zadeh, L. A. (1970). “Decision-making in a fuzzy environment”, Management Science, 17(4), B-141-164.
• Blanco-Mesa, F., Merigó, J. M., & Gil-Lafuente, A. M. (2017). “Fuzzy Decision Making: A Bibliometric-Based Review”, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 32(3), 2033-2050.
• Bragge, J., Korhonen, P., Wallenius, H., & Wallenius, J. (2010). “Bibliometric Analysis of Multiple Criteria Decision Making/Multiattribute Utility Theory”, In Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems (s. 259-268), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Büyüközkan, G., & Çifçi, G., A (2012). ‘‘A Novel Hybrid MCDM Approach Based on Fuzzy DEMATEL, Fuzzy ANP and Fuzzy TOPSIS to Evaluate Green Suppliers”, Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 3000–3011.
• Chai, J., Liu, J. N., & Ngai, E. W. (2013). “Application of Decision-Making Techniques in Supplier Selection: A Systematic Review of Literature”, Expert Systems With Applications, 40(10), 3872-3885.
• Chen, C. T., Lin, C. T., & Huang, S. F. (2006). “A Fuzzy Approach for Supplier Evaluation and Selection in Supply Chain Management”, International Journal of Production Economics, 102(2), 289-301.
• Chowdhury, P., & Paul, S.K. (2020). Applications of MCDM methods in research on corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review. Management of Environmental Quality, 31(2), 385–405.
• Dağdeviren, M., Yavuz, S., & Kılınç, N. (2009). “Weapon Selection Using the AHP and TOPSIS Methods Under Fuzzy Environment”, Expert Systems With Applications, 36(4), 8143-8151.
• Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015).”The Bibliometric Analysis of Scholarly Groduction: How great is the Impact?”, Scientometrics, 105(3), 1809-1831.
• Guerrero-Baena, M. D., Gómez-Limón, J. A., & Fruet Cardozo, J. V. (2014). “Are Multi-Criteria Decision Making Techniques Useful for Solving Corporate Finance Problems? A Bibliometric Analysis”, Revista de Metodos Cuantitativos para la Economia y la Empresa, 17, 60-79.
• Gul, M., Celik, E., Aydin, N., Gumus, A. T., & Guneri, A. F. (2016). A state of the art literature review of VIKOR and its fuzzy extensions on applications. Applied Soft Computing, 46, 60-89.
• Hotamışlı, M., & Erem, I. (2014). Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi’nde yayınlanan makalelerin bibliyometrik analizi. Muhasebe ve finansman Dergisi, (63), 1-20.
• Kahraman, C., Onar, S. C., & Oztaysi, B. (2015). Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. International journal of computational intelligence systems, 8(4), 637-666.
• Lawani, S. M (1981), “Bibliometrics: Its Theoretical Foundations, Methods and Applications”, International Journal of Libraries and Information Services, Cilt: 31, Sayı: 4, ss. 294-315.
• Liao, H., Tang, M., Zhang, X., & Al-Barakati, A. (2019). “Detecting and Visualizing in the Field of Hesitant Fuzzy sets: A Bibliometric Analysis From 2009 to 2018”, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 21(5), 1289-1305.
• Liu, H. C., Chen, X. Q., Duan, C. Y., & Wang, Y. M. (2019). Failure mode and effect analysis using multi-criteria decision making methods: A systematic literature review. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 135, 881-897.
• Liu, W., & Liao, H. (2017). “A Bibliometric Analysis of Fuzzy Decision Research During 1970–2015”, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 19(1), 1-14.
• Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Techniques and Applications–Two Decades Review From 1994 to 2014”, Expert Systems with Applications, 42(8), 4126-4148.
• Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., Nor, K., Khalifah, Z., Zakwan, N., & Valipour, A. (2015). Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications–a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28(1), 516-571.
• Merigó, J. M., & Yang, J. B. (2017). A bibliometric analysis of operations research and management science. Omega, 73, 37-48.
• Morkūnaitė, Ž.,Kalibatas, D., & Kalibatienė, D. (2019). “A Bibliometric Data Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods in Heritage Buildings”, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 25(2), 76-99.
• Osareh, F.(1996). “Bibliometrics, Citation Analysis and Co-citation Analysis: A Review of Literature I”, Libri, 46(3), 149-158.
• Peng, X., & Dai, J. (2018). “A Bibliometric Analysis of Neutrosophic Set: Two Decades Review From 1998 to 2017”, Artificial Intelligence Review, 1-57.
• Polat, Z. A., Saraçoğlu, A., & Duman, H. (2019). Harita Dergisi’nin Bibliyometrik Analizi. Harita Dergisi, 161, 46-56.
• Renganath, K., & Suresh, M. (2016, December). Supplier selection using fuzzy MCDM techniques: A literature review. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Computing Research (ICCIC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
• Stevens, R.E. (1953). “Characteristics of Subject Literatures”, Chicago: American College and Research Library Monography Series 7.
• Stojčić, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., & Mardani, A. (2019). Application of MCDM methods in sustainability engineering: A literature review 2008–2018. Symmetry, 11(3), 350.
• Tramarico, C. L.,Salomon, V. A. P., &Marins, F. A. S. (2015). “Analytic Hierarchy Process and Supply Chain Management: A Bibliometric Study”, Procedia Computer Science, 55, 441-450.
• Tzeng, G. H., Chiang, C. H., & Li, C. W. (2007). “Evaluating Intertwined Effects in E-learning Programs: A Novel Hybrid MCDM Model Based on Factor Analysis and DEMATEL”, Expert Systems with Applications, 32(4), 1028-1044.
• Wang, J. J., Jing, Y. Y., Zhang, C. F., & Zhao, J. H. (2009). “Review on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Aid in Sustainable Energy Decision-Making”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(9), 2263-2278.
• Wang, T. C., & Chang, T. H. (2007). “Application of TOPSIS in Evaluating Initial Training Aircraft Under a Fuzzy Environment”, Expert Systems with Applications, 33(4), 870-880.
• Wang, Y. M., & Elhag, T. M. (2006). “Fuzzy TOPSIS Method Based on Alpha Level Sets With an Application to Bridge Risk Assessment”, Expert Systems with Applications, 31(2), 309-319.
• Yu, D., Wang, W., Zhang, W., & Zhang, S. (2018). “A Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Multiple Criteria Decision Making”, Current Science, 114(4), 747-758. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). “Fuzzy sets”, Information and Control” 8(3), 338-353.
• Zadeh, L. A. (1975). “The Concept of a Linguistic Variable and Its Application to Approximate Reasoning I”, Information Sciences, 8, 199-249.
• Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of Art Surveys of Overviews on MCDM/MADM Methods”, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(1), 165-179.
• Zyoud, S. H., & Fuchs-Hanusch, D. (2017). “A Bibliometric-Based Survey on AHP and TOPSIS Techniques”, Expert Systems with Applications, 78, 158-181.