The evaluation of airline service quality by fuzzy MCDM.

By Sheng-Hshiung Tsaur, Te-Yi Chang, Chang-Hua Yen. 2002

944 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Control and Systems Engineering, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6c8f390c30f3507d7c606a724a77f25b32c83e58

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Control and Systems Engineering

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Extension of fuzzy TOPSIS method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets (2009, methodology): “Tsaur et al. [7] convert fuzzy MCDM problem into a crisp one via centroid defuzzification and then solve the non-fuzzy MCDM problem using the TOPSIS method.”
Modelling the Impact of Airline Service Quality and Marketing Variables on Passengers’ Future Behavioural Intentions (2006, methodology): “Several researchers have applied service quality theories and methods in the airline setting (Alotaibi, 1992; Ostrowski et al ., 1993; Sultan & Simpson, 2000; Chang & Yeh, 2002; Tsaur et al ., 2002).”
Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis (2012, background): “[127] do this right at the beginning, representing fuzzy evaluations by their centroids and calcu-”
Strategic analysis of healthcare service quality using fuzzy AHP methodology (2011, methodology): “AHP is one of the most popular and powerful MCDM method for decision making that has been used for years in service quality assessment (Liu et al., 2005; Tsaur et al., 2002).”
Using a multi-criteria decision making approach to evaluate mobile phone alternatives (2007, methodology): “[29] utilize AHP in order to obtain criteria weight and TOPSIS to obtain the ranking when evaluating airline services quality.”
Quality of Service in Public Transport Based on Customer Satisfaction Surveys: A Review and Assessment of Methodological Approaches (2015, methodology): “…(2007); Liou et al. (2011b); Nejati, Nejati, and Shafaei (2009); Pakdil and Aydin (2007); Sultan and Simpson (2000); Tsai, Hsu, and Chou (2011); Tsaur, Chang, and Yen (2002) Only performance perceptions Chen and Chang (2005); Christopher, Stuart, and Foote (1999); Chou et al. (2011a); Eboli…”