Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | preprint |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | SciELO Preprints |
Texto Completo: | https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3576 |
Resumo: | Purpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research. |
id |
SCI-1_58364f99aa675b5e8b3a34734e7c5eea |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/3576 |
network_acronym_str |
SCI-1 |
network_name_str |
SciELO Preprints |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 yearsMulticriteriaMCDAMCDMbibliometric analysisAHPTOPSISVIKORPROMETHEEANPPurpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research.SciELO PreprintsSciELO PreprintsSciELO Preprints2022-03-21info:eu-repo/semantics/preprintinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/357610.1590/SciELOPreprints.3576enghttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/3576/7017Copyright (c) 2022 Márcio Basílio, Valdecy Pereira, Helder Gomes Costa, Marcos dos Santos, Amartya Ghoshhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBasílio, MárcioPereira, ValdecyCosta, Helder GomesSantos, Marcos dosGhosh, Amartyareponame:SciELO Preprintsinstname:SciELOinstacron:SCI2022-03-14T03:19:38Zoai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/3576Servidor de preprintshttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scieloONGhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/oaiscielo.submission@scielo.orgopendoar:2022-03-14T03:19:38SciELO Preprints - SciELOfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
title |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
spellingShingle |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years Basílio, Márcio Multicriteria MCDA MCDM bibliometric analysis AHP TOPSIS VIKOR PROMETHEE ANP |
title_short |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
title_full |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
title_fullStr |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
title_full_unstemmed |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
title_sort |
Bibliometric analysis of scientific production on methods to aid decision making in the last 40 years |
author |
Basílio, Márcio |
author_facet |
Basílio, Márcio Pereira, Valdecy Costa, Helder Gomes Santos, Marcos dos Ghosh, Amartya |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Pereira, Valdecy Costa, Helder Gomes Santos, Marcos dos Ghosh, Amartya |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Basílio, Márcio Pereira, Valdecy Costa, Helder Gomes Santos, Marcos dos Ghosh, Amartya |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Multicriteria MCDA MCDM bibliometric analysis AHP TOPSIS VIKOR PROMETHEE ANP |
topic |
Multicriteria MCDA MCDM bibliometric analysis AHP TOPSIS VIKOR PROMETHEE ANP |
description |
Purpose: Multicriteria methods have gained traction in both academia and industry practices for effective decision-making over the years. This bibliometric study aims to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on multicriteria methods, in its various aspects, over the past forty-four years. Design/Methodology/Approach: The Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases were searched for publications from January 1945 to April 29, 2021, on multicriteria methods in titles, abstracts, and keywords. The bibliographic data were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package. Findings: This bibliometric study asserts that 29,050 authors have produced 20,861 documents on the theme of multicriteria methods in 131 countries in the last forty-four years. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 13.88 per year. China is the leading country in publications with 14.14%; India with 10.76%; and Iran with 8.09%. Islamic Azad University leads others with 504 publications, followed by the Vilnius Gediminas Technical University with 456 and the National Institute of Technology with 336. As for journals, Expert Systems With Applications; Sustainability; and Journal of Cleaner Production are the leading journals, which account for more than 4.67% of all indexed literature. Furthermore, Zavadskas E. and Wang J have the highest publications in the multicriteria methods domain regarding the authors. Regarding the most commonly used multicriteria decision-making methods, AHP is the most favored approach among the ten countries with the most publications in this research area, followed by TOPSIS, VIKOR, PROMETHEE, and ANP. Practical implications: The bibliometric literature review method allows the researchers to explore the multicriteria research area more extensively than the traditional literature review method. It enables a large dataset of bibliographic records to be systematically analyzed through statistical measures, yielding informative insights. Originality/value: The usefulness of this bibliometric study is summed in presenting an overview of the topic of the multicriteria methods during the previous forty-four years, allowing other academics to use this research as a starting point for their research. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-03-21 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/preprint info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
preprint |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3576 10.1590/SciELOPreprints.3576 |
url |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/3576 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/SciELOPreprints.3576 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/3576/7017 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:SciELO Preprints instname:SciELO instacron:SCI |
instname_str |
SciELO |
instacron_str |
SCI |
institution |
SCI |
reponame_str |
SciELO Preprints |
collection |
SciELO Preprints |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints - SciELO |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
scielo.submission@scielo.org |
_version_ |
1797047827169280000 |