Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Multiple criteria performance evaluation of YouTube mathematical educational videos by IS-TOPSIS

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Operational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this work, a TOPSIS-based approach is proposed based on the idea of ideal similarity. It considers the ideal solution not necessarily related to the optimum values of the decision criteria, but to any values between the minimum and maximum values of the criteria ranges. The proposed method allows the consideration of one or several decision makers; different types of data (single numerical values, intervals or linguistic variables); different normalization functions describing the importance given by the decision makers to the deviation of alternatives from the ideal solution and different weighting schemes. The procedure also allows the decision maker to decide how much information about the intervals he is willing to take into account (e.g. the expected value, the extremes of the interval or the entire set of values in the intervals). In order to illustrate the practical applicability of the approach we include a real example consisting of the ranking of mathematical educational videos based on six didactical dimensions. The rating of educational videos is of great interest for educators due to their high popularity in Internet, especially in platforms as You Tube which has become one of the most used sources of information nowadays.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arroyo-Cañada FJ, Gil-Lafuente J (2017) A fuzzy asymmetric TOPSIS model for optimizing investment in online advertising campaigns. Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0368-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azer SA, AlGrain HA, AlKhelaif RA, AlEshaiwi SM (2013) Evaluation of the educational value of YouTube videos about physical examination of the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. J Med Internet Res 15(11):e241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behzadian M, Otaghsara SK, Yazdani M, Ignatius J (2012) A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Syst Appl 39(7):13051–13069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilbao-Terol A, Arenas-Parra M, Onopko-Onopko V (2017) Measuring regional sustainable competitiveness: a multi-criteria approach. Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0367-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brans JP, Vincke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects the PROMETHEE method. Eur J Oper Res 24:228–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cables E, Lamata MT, Verdegay JL (2016) RIM-reference ideal method in multicriteria decision making. Inf Sci 337–338:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canós L, Casasús T, Liern V, Pérez JC (2014) Soft computing methods for personnel selection based on the valuation of competences. Int J Intell Syst 29:1079–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çelen A (2014) Comparative analysis of normalization procedures in TOPSIS method with an application to Turkish deposit banking market. Informatica 25(2):185–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty S, Yeh CH (2009) A simulation comparison of normalization procedures for TOPSIS. In: Proceeding of computers industrial engineering international conference CIE 2009, pp 1815–1820

  • Chang CH, Lin JJ, Lin JH, Chiang MC (2010) Domestic open-end equity mutual fund performance evaluation using extended TOPSIS method with different distance approaches. Expert Syst Appl 37:4642–4649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SJ, Hwang CL (1992) Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods and applications, vol 375. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Churchman CW, Ackoff RL (1954) An approximate measure of value. J Oper Res Soc Am 2(2):172–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois D, Prade H (1978) Fuzzy sets and systems theory and applications. Mathematics in science and engineering, vol 14. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dymova L, Sevastjanov P, Tikhonenko A (2013) An approach to generalization of fuzzy TOPSIS method. Inf Sci 238:149–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gendall P, Hoek J (1990) A question of wording. Mark Bull 5:25–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Godino JD, Wilhelmi MR, Bencomo D (2005) Suitability criteria of a mathematical instruction process. A teaching experience of the function notion. Mediterr J Res Math Educ 4(2):1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Godino JD, Batanero C, Font V (2007) The onto-semiotic approach to research in mathematics education. Int J Math Educ 39(1–2):127–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomes LFAM, Lima MMPP (1992) TODIM basics and application to multicriteria ranking of projects with environmental impacts. Found Comput Decis Sci 16(4):113–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilpern S (1992) The expected value of a fuzzy number. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 47(1):81–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(92)90062-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications a State of the Art Survey. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann A, Gupta MM (1988) Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. North-Holland, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Khademi-Zare H, Zarei M, Sadeghieh A, Saleh Owlia M (2010) Ranking the strategic actions of Iran mobile cellular telecommunication using two models of fuzzy QFD. Telecommun Policy 34:747–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milani AS, Shanian R, Madoliat R, Nemes JA (2005) The effect of normalization norms in multiple attribute decision making models a case study in gear material selection. Struct Multidiscipl Optim 29(4):312–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opricovic S (1998) Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade

    Google Scholar 

  • Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) The Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156(2):445–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlicic D (2001) Normalization affects the results of MADM methods. Yugosl J Oper Res 11(2):251–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Pino-Fan L, Assis A, Castro WF (2015) Towards a methodology for the characterization of teachers’ didactic-mathematical knowledge. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 11(6):1429–1456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy B (1968) Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples La méthode ELECTRE. Rev Franfaise Inform Rech Oper 6(8):57–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy B (1985) Méthodologie Multicritère d’aide à la Décision. Economica, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos-Mellado JA, Acuña-Soto CM, Blasco-Blasco O, Liern V (2017) Use of maths video tutorials. What are the users looking for? In: Proceedings 9th annual international conference on education and new learning technologies, pp 8536–8541

  • Tan C (2011) A multi-criteria interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making with Choquet integral-based TOPSIS. Expert Syst Appl 38:3023–3033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomaidis F, Konidari P, Mavrakis D (2008) The wholesale natural gas market prospects in the Energy Community Treaty countries. Oper Res 8(1):63–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Triantaphyllou E (2000) Multi-criteria decision making: a comparative study. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vega A, Aguarón J, García-Alcaraz J, Moreno-Jiménez JM (2014) Notes on dependent attributes in TOPSIS. Proc Comput Sci 31:308–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang YJ (2014) A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model by associating technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution with relative preference relation. Inf Sci 268:169–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Q, Du P, Wang Y, Liang B (2017) Developing a rough set based approach for group decision making based on determining weights of decision makers with interval numbers. Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0344-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon KP, Hwang CL (1995) Multiple attribute decision making: an introduction. Sage, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zanakis SH, Solomon A, Wishart N, Dublish S (1998) Multi-attribute decision making: a simulation comparison of select methods. Eur J Oper Res 107(3):507–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas EK, Peldschus F, Ustinovichius L (2003) Development of software for multiple criteria evaluation. Informatica 14(2):259–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas EK, Zakarevicius A, Antucheviciene J (2006) Evaluation of ranking accuracy in multi-criteria decisions. Informatica 17(4):601–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng W, Guo P (2008) Normalized distance, similarity measure, inclusion measure and entropy of interval-valued fuzzy sets and their relationship. Inf Sci 178:1334–1342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann HJ (1996) Fuzzy set theory. Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Zyoud SH, Fuchs-Hanusch D (2017) A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Syst Appl 78:158–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratorio Iberoamericano para la valoración de procesos educativos de la enseñanza de la matemática (LAPIBE), Departamento de Matemática Educativa, CINVESTAV - Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Av. Instituto Politécnico Nacional 2508, 07360, Mexico City, Mexico

    Claudia Margarita Acuña-Soto

  2. Laboratorio Iberoamericano para la valoración de procesos educativos de la enseñanza de la matemática (LAPIBE), Departamento de Matemáticas para la Economía y la Empresa, Universidad de Valencia, Av. Tarongers, s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain

    Vicente Liern

  3. Economía Cuantitativa, Universidad de Oviedo, Avenida del Cristo, s/n, 33006, Oviedo, Spain

    Blanca Pérez-Gladish

Authors
  1. Claudia Margarita Acuña-Soto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vicente Liern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Blanca Pérez-Gladish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Blanca Pérez-Gladish.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 11, 12 and 13.

Table 11 Individual scores and consensual intervals
Full size table
Table 12 Individual linguistic rates and consensual rates
Full size table
Table 13 Numerical transformation of linguistic labels
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Acuña-Soto, C.M., Liern, V. & Pérez-Gladish, B. Multiple criteria performance evaluation of YouTube mathematical educational videos by IS-TOPSIS. Oper Res Int J 20, 2017–2039 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-0405-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-0405-2

Keywords