Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Technique to Identify Key Factors Influencing Microblog Users’ Diffusion Behaviors in Emergencies: Evidence from Generations Born after 2000
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Related Works
3. Identification of Factors Affecting Diffusion Behavior
3.1. User Perception
3.2. Platform Perception
3.3. Information Content
3.4. Social Factors
3.5. Personal Characteristics
4. Methodology
4.1. Delphi Method
4.2. D-ANP
5. Empirical Study
5.1. Establishing the Formal Decision Structure
5.2. Determine the Total Influence Matrix
5.3. Identification of Key Factors
5.4. Management Implications
6. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hughes, A.L.; Palen, L. Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. Int. J. Emerg. Manag. 2009, 6, 248–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miles, B.; Morse, S. The role of news media in natural disaster risk and recovery. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63, 365–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaigo, M. Social media usage during disasters and social capital: Twitter and the Great East Japan earthquake. Keio Commun. Rev. 2012, 34, 19–35. [Google Scholar]
- Yu, J.; Liu, C. Empirical Study on Micro-blog User’s Behavior Patterns of Information Distribution. J. Mod. Inf. 2015, 10, 49–54. [Google Scholar]
- Ou Yang, Y.; Shieh, H.; Tzeng, G. A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP for information security risk control assessment. Inf. Sci. 2013, 232, 482–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allsop, D.T.; Bassett, B.R.; Hoskins, J.A. Word-of-Mouth Research: Principles and Applications. J. Advert. Res. 2007, 47, 398–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morris, E.K. Public information, dissemination, and behavior analysis. Behav. Anal. 1985, 8, 95–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, B.T.W.; To, W.M. The effect of internal information generation and dissemination on casino employee work related behaviors. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2013, 33, 475–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gough, A.; Hunter, R.; Ajao, O.; Jurek, A.; McKeown, G.; Hong, J.; Barrett, E.; Ferguson, M.; McElwee, G.; McCarthy, M.; et al. Tweet for Behavior Change: Using Social Media for the Dissemination of Public Health Messages. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2017, 3, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F.F.; Zhang, S.T. Analyzing Information Behaviors of Mobile Social Network Users. Data Anal. Knowl. Discov. 2018, 16, 99–109. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.P.; Warshaw, P.R. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1992, 22, 1111–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, T.D. On User Studies and Information Needs. J. Doc. 2006, 62, 658–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.X.; Yang, X.; Li, M.X. Influencing Factors of the User’s Information Dissemination Behavior in Real-Name SNS Websites. J. Intell. 2014, 33, 121, 176–181. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X. Research on College Students’ Information Dissemination Behavior Preference during Campus Crisis. China Saf. Sci. J. 2012, 7, 59–65. [Google Scholar]
- Alm, J.; Jackson, B.R.; Mckee, M. Audit Information Dissemination, Taxpayer Communication, and Compliance Behavior. SSRN Electron. J. 2006, 4, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, T. Observation on copying and pasting behavior during the Tohoku earthquake: Retweet pattern changes. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014, 34, 546–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, X.Z.; An, J.; Wang, Y. We Chat User’s Information Release Behavior Based on Technology Acceptance Model. J. China Soc. Sci. Tech. Inf. 2015, 34, 801–808. [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, J.H. A Study on User’s Participation Behavior of Public Opinion Diffusion in Microblog. Ph.D. Thesis, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Jin, X.L.; Feng, H.H.; Zhou, Z.Y. An Empirical Study on Healthcare Information Diffusion Behavior in WeChat Moments. J. Manag. Sci. 2017, 30, 73–82. [Google Scholar]
- Ding, X.W.; Wu, Z.; Xia, Z.J. The Empirical Research of Sentiment Factors Effect on User’s Retweet Behavior—A Case Study of Sina Microblog. J. Mod. Inf. 2014, 34, 147–155. [Google Scholar]
- Stieglitz, S.; Dang-Xuan, L. Emotions and Information Diffusion in Social Media—Sentiment of Microblogs and Sharing Behavior. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2014, 29, 217–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.Y.; Lu, X.B. Research on Influence Factors of Mobile Social Media Technology Acceptance and Matching—Taking the Mobil Micro-blog Client Release Behavior as an Example. Econ. Manag. 2013, 27, 84–88. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, B. The Influencing Factors of Public Crisis Information Dissemination Behavior under Mobile Internet Environment. J. Intell. 2013, 6, 14–18. [Google Scholar]
- Ge, J.H.; Wang, S.P.; Zhou, S.D. Research on motivation of online comment release of online shoppers based on SEM. Mod. Econ. Res. 2017, 6, 64–70. [Google Scholar]
- Shan, S.; Liu, M.; Xu, X. Analysis of the key influencing factors of haze information dissemination behavior and motivation in WeChat. Inf. Discov. Deliv. 2017, 45, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Huang, C.; Ye, M.L. An empirical study on the influencing factors of user health information diffusion in microblog environment. Res. Libr. Sci. 2017, 21, 81–91. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, S.J.; Wang, Y.Q. A Study About the Influencing Factors of Social Media Content Sharing Desire: Taking Microblog User’s forward behavior as an Example. J. Xidian Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2015, 1, 19–26. [Google Scholar]
- Jin, X.L.; Jin, K.E.; Tang, Z.Y. Factors Influencing Content Forwarding Behavior in Microblog during Emergency Events: A Perspective of Information Source. J. China Soc. Sci. Tech. Inf. 2015, 34, 809–818. [Google Scholar]
- Shi, J.; Lai, K.K.; Hu, P.; Chen, G. Factors dominating individual information disseminating behavior on social networking sites. Inf. Technol. Manag. 2018, 19, 121–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, B.B.; Xia, Z.J.; Yu, L.P. The Research of Motivation for Information Sharing of Online Social Network Users in Emergency Event. J. Intell. 2013, 32, 162. [Google Scholar]
- Peng, K.; Zhu, Q.H.; Wang, X.F. Empirical Research on Influential Factors of Sharing Behavior of Micro-blog Users. Doc. Inf. Knowl. 2013, 152, 81–87. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Q.G.; Chen, J.L.; Gan, L. Research on the Collective Behavior Intention of Network Microblog in Social Crisis. J. Public Manag. 2016, 13, 65–80. [Google Scholar]
- Jin, X.L.; Fang, Y.; Zhou, Z.Y. Understanding User-generated Information Sharing in Microblog—Based on Impulsive Behavior Perspective. J. China Soc. Sci. Tech. Inf. 2016, 35, 739–748. [Google Scholar]
- Stefanone, M.A.; Jang, C.Y. Writing for Friends and Family: The Interpersonal Nature of Blogs. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2007, 13, 123–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, F.D. Perceived usefulness, Perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 319–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsu, C.; Lin, J.C. Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation. Inf. Manag. 2008, 45, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stuart, J.B.; Martin, B. Modeling use continuance behavior in microblogging services: The case of Twitter. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2011, 51, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Ropeik, D. Risk communication and non-linearity. Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 2009, 28, 7–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.Y. Research on Determined Factors of Publishing Behavior Intention via Mobile Micro-blog Application. Master’s Thesis, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Gefen, D.; Karahanna, E.; Straub, D.W. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Q. 2003, 27, 51–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, L.; Lu, Y.B. A Study on Users’ Behavior Intention and Platform’s Moderate Effect of Microblog. Chin. J. Manag. 2014, 11, 278–282. [Google Scholar]
- Henri, B.; Jon, H. Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Q. 1994, 18, 59–82. [Google Scholar]
- Schmidt, R.C. Managing Delphi Surveys Using Nonparametric Statistical Techniques. Decis. Sci. 1997, 28, 763–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferri, C.P.; Prince, M.; Brayne, C.; Brodaty, H.; Fratiglioni, L.; Ganguli, M.; Hall, K.; Hasegawa, K.; Hendrie, H.; Huang, Y.; et al. Global prevalence of dementia: A Delphi consensus study. Lancet 2005, 366, 2112–2117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Y.; Lee, P.; Chuang, Y.; Chiu, Y. Improving the Sustainable Competitiveness of Service Quality within Air Cargo Terminals. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Okoli, C.; Pawlowski, S.D. The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Inf. Manag. 2004, 42, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Saaty, T.L. Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: Analytic Network Process; RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, Y.C.; Tsai, J.F. Backpropagation Multi-Layer Perceptron for Incomplete Pairwise Comparison Matrices in Analytic Hierarchy Process. Appl. Math. Comput. 2006, 180, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Z.; Wei, C. A Consistency Improving Method in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1999, 116, 443–449. [Google Scholar]
- Ziemba, P.; Watrobski, J. Selected Issues of Rank Reversal Problem in ANP Method; Springer, Cham: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 203–225. [Google Scholar]
- Ziemba, P.; Watrobski, J.; Jankowski, J.; Piwowarski, M. Research on the Properties of the AHP in the Environment of Inaccurate Expert Evaluations; Springer, Cham: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 227–243. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, W. Choosing knowledge management strategies by using a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 2008, 35, 828–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fontela, E.; Gabus, A. DEMATEL, Innovative Methods, Report No. 2, Structural Analysis of the World Problematique; Battelle Geneva Research Institute: Geneva, Switzerland, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Fontela, E.; Gabus, A. The DEMATEL Observer; Battelle Institute, Geneva Research Center: Geneva, Switzerland, 1976. [Google Scholar]
- Ou Yang, Y.P.; Shieh, H.M.; Leu, J.D.; Tzeng, G.H. A novel hybrid MCDM model combined with DEMATEL and ANP with applications. Int. J. Oper. Res. 2008, 5, 160–168. [Google Scholar]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Huang, J.J. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Tseng, M. Application of ANP and DEMATEL to evaluate the decision-making of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2009, 156, 181–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, W.; Chou, W. Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 1444–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Büyüközkan, G.; Çifçi, G. A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. Expert Syst. Appl. 2012, 39, 3000–3011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uygun, Ö.; Kaçamak, H.; Kahraman, Ü.A. An integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a telecommunication company. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2015, 86, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, Y.C.; Chiu, Y.J.; Hsu, C.S.; Chang, Y.Y. Identifying Key Factors for Introducing GPS-Based Fleet Management Systems to the Logistics Industry. Math. Probl. Eng. 2015, 2015, 413203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, P.; Hu, Y.C.; Yen, G.F.; Tsao, S.J. Green supplier selection for sustainable development of the automotive industry using grey decision-making. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 26, 890–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, P.; Hu, Y.C.; Yen, G.F.; Jiang, H.; Chiu, Y.J. Using a Novel Grey DANP Model to Identify Interactions between Manufacturing and Logistics Industries in China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Truchon, M. Borda and the maximum likelihood approach to vote aggregation. Math. Soc. Sci. 2008, 55, 96–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Wang, Z.; Klir, G.J. Genetic algorithms for determining fuzzy measures from data. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 1998, 6, 171–183. [Google Scholar]
Aspect | Criteria | Definition | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
User | Perceived usefulness | Users perceive that posting or forwarding microblogs is useful for their personal image, enhancement of their social relationships, emotional catharsis, etc. | Davis [35]; Hsu and Lin [36] |
Perceived happiness | Users feel happy when posting or forwarding microblogs. | Stuart and Martin, [37] | |
Perceived risk | Users perceive that the risk of posting or forwarding microblogs, with respect to personal information leakage or spreading false information, may possibly affect their reputation and that they may possibly be breaking the law. | Ropeik [38] | |
Platform | Perceived ease of use | Users perceive that the platform is easy to use, such as when posting or forwarding, and that it can be accessed in a variety of ways (mobile phone, computer, iPad). | Davis [35] |
Perceived system reliability | Users perceive that the Microblog system platform is reliable. If posting or forwarding microblogs, it will not crash, break down, or fail to respond. | Xu [39] | |
Perceived interface friendliness | Users perceive the interface of the Microblog platform to be user friendly, for example, the client or mobile client interface is reasonable and easy to use. | Xu [39] | |
Perceived accessibility | Users perceive the Microblog platform to be accessible (i.e., that it meets their needs to publish or forward their microblogs at any time and place). | Xu [39] | |
Perceived platform trust | Users trust the Microblog platform regarding its information authenticity, and trust that their private personal details will not be revealed when posting or forwarding on the platform. | Gefen, Karahanna, and Straub [40] | |
Information Content | Information integrity | Users perceive Microblog information to be of good quality, and not one-sided but complete. | Li et al. [26] |
Timeliness of information | Users perceive the Microblog information content to be timely. | Li et al. [26] | |
Information authoritativeness | Users perceived the Microblog information content to be authoritative. | Li et al. [26] | |
Information reliability | Users perceive the Microblog information content to be authentic and reliable. | Li et al. [26] | |
Social Factors | Civic responsibility | Users perceive that posting or forwarding emergency microblog information is consistent with their roles and responsibilities as citizens. | Wang, Xia, and Yu Liping [30] |
Subjective norm | Users perceive some social pressure regarding whether to publish or forward emergency microblog information. | Ajzen [41] | |
Reciprocity consciousness | Users perceive that posting or forwarding emergency microblog information is reciprocal. | Shi and Lu [42] | |
Reputation seeking | Users perceive that posting or forwarding emergency microblog information can serve to enhance personal prestige. | Shi and Lu [42] | |
Altruism | Users believe that they were in the same situation as those who had experienced an emergency, posting or forwarding this information would be of use to them. | Shi and Lu [42] | |
Moral perception | Users feel an emotional response in posting or forwarding emergency microblog information, that they are meeting ethical expectations they have for themselves and toward others. | Wang, Xia, and Yu Liping [30] | |
Emotional sharing | Users post or forward microblogs to vent their emotions during emergencies. | Ge, Wang, and Zhou [24] | |
Personal Factors | Personal characteristic | Users’ personal characteristics, such as gender, age, education degree, etc. | Wang and Zhang [10] |
Microblog involvement | Microblog involvement, such as the years of use, number of followers, number of follows, and number of posts. | Henri and Jon [43] |
Experts | Title | Gender | Research Field or Jobs | Work Experience (Year) |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | Associate professor | Male | Emergency events management | 10–15 |
B | Associate professor | Male | Social media | 20–25 |
C | Associate professor | Male | Public opinion control | 10–15 |
D | National level 2 psychological counselor | Female | Psychological counseling for students | 20–25 |
E | Office staff member | Male | Student’s affairs | 10–15 |
Aspect | Criteria | Score of Criteria Necessities (0–100) | Mean | SD | CDI | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | ||||||
User | Perceived usefulness | 85 | 95 | 100 | 80 | 100 | 92 | 8.1240 | 0.0883 | |
Perceived emotionality | 80 | 95 | 90 | 90 | 100 | 91 | 6.6332 | 0.0729 | ||
Perceived risk | 85 | 85 | 95 | 75 | 100 | 88 | 8.7178 | 0.0991 | ||
Microblog involvement | Age of using | 86 | 80 | 80 | 90 | 80 | 83.2 | 4.1183 | 0.0495 | |
Number of followers | 90 | 100 | 85 | 90 | 90 | 91 | 4.8990 | 0.0538 | ||
Number of follows | 95 | 95 | 90 | 90 | 90 | 92 | 2.4495 | 0.0266 | ||
number of posts | 95 | 90 | 100 | 90 | 100 | 95 | 4.4721 | 0.0471 | ||
Platform | Perceived ease of use | 90 | 90 | 90 | 95 | 100 | 93 | 4.0000 | 0.0430 | |
Perceived system reliability | 80 | 80 | 90 | 90 | 100 | 88 | 7.4833 | 0.0850 | ||
Perceived interface friendliness | 80 | 85 | 85 | 90 | 100 | 88 | 6.7823 | 0.0771 | ||
Perceived accessibility | 90 | 85 | 85 | 99 | 100 | 91.8 | 6.5544 | 0.0714 | ||
Information content | Timeliness of information | 90 | 95 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 97 | 4.0000 | 0.0412 | |
Information authoritativeness | 80 | 95 | 95 | 90 | 100 | 92 | 6.7823 | 0.0737 | ||
Information reliability | 75 | 95 | 85 | 100 | 95 | 90 | 8.9443 | 0.0994 | ||
Social factors | Reputation seeking | 70 | 90 | 95 | 88 | 90 | 86.6 | 8.6163 | 0.0995 | |
Altruism | 90 | 95 | 85 | 95 | 100 | 93 | 5.0990 | 0.0548 | ||
Moral perception | 75 | 95 | 90 | 95 | 100 | 91 | 8.6023 | 0.0945 | ||
Emotional sharing | 85 | 95 | 85 | 100 | 90 | 91 | 5.8310 | 0.0641 |
Aspect | Criteria | Definition |
---|---|---|
User (A) | Perceived usefulness (A1) | Users perceive that posting or forwarding microblogs is useful for personal image, social relationship enhancement, emotional catharsis, etc. |
Perceived emotionality (A2) | Users feel some kind of emotion to post or forward microblogs. | |
Perceived risk (A3) | Users perceive the risk of posting or forwarding microblogs, such as personal information leakage, spreading unreal information, possibly affecting reputation and possibly breaking the law. | |
Microblog involvement (A4) | Microblog involvement, such as the age of using, number of followers, number of follows and number of posts. | |
Platform (B) | Perceived ease of use (B1) | Users perceive that the platform is easy to use, such as posting or forwarding, and can be accessed in a variety of ways (mobile phone, computer, iPad). |
Perceived system reliability (B2) | Users perceive that the system platform of Microblog is reliable. If posting or forwarding microblogs, it will not crash, breakdown, or fail to respond. | |
Perceived interface friendliness (B3) | Users perceive the friendly interface of Microblog platform, for example, the client or mobile client interface is reasonable and easy to use. | |
Perceived accessibility (B4) | Users are aware of the accessibility of the Microblog platform, such as being able to meet the needs of users to publish or forward the microblogs at any time and place. | |
Information Content (C) | Timeliness of information (C1) | User’s perception of the Microblog information content quality and believed that they are timely. |
Information authoritativeness (C2) | User’s perception of the Microblog information content quality and believed that they are authoritative. | |
Information reliability (C3) | User’s perception of the Microblog information content quality and believed that they are authentic and reliable. | |
Social Factors (D) | Reputation seeking (D1) | Users perceive that posting or forwarding emergency microblogs information can improve personal prestige effectively. |
Altruism (D2) | Users perceive a kind of emotion of that in the same situation with someone who experienced an emergency, and posting or forwarding is to realize the utility satisfaction of others. | |
Moral perception (D3) | Users perceive that posting or forwarding emergency microblog information is an emotional response of self-ethics and ethics. | |
Emotional sharing (D4) | Users post or forward microblogs for releasing emotions in emergencies. |
Criteria. | A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | B1 | B2 | B3 | B4 | C1 | C2 | C3 | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | 0.0000 | 1.1290 | 1.0968 | 1.0000 | 1.1129 | 1.1290 | 1.1613 | 1.0806 | 1.2097 | 1.1290 | 1.1129 | 1.0484 | 1.0806 | 1.2131 | 1.2459 |
A2 | 1.1613 | 0.0000 | 1.0806 | 1.1129 | 1.1639 | 1.2295 | 1.1129 | 1.1290 | 1.0820 | 1.1613 | 1.0968 | 1.1452 | 1.0806 | 1.1967 | 1.1311 |
A3 | 1.0968 | 1.0968 | 0.0000 | 1.0984 | 0.9839 | 1.0968 | 1.1475 | 1.0161 | 0.9839 | 1.1452 | 1.0323 | 1.2097 | 0.9677 | 1.0164 | 1.0656 |
A4 | 0.9516 | 1.1129 | 1.2295 | 0.0000 | 1.0164 | 1.0484 | 1.0968 | 1.1613 | 1.1452 | 1.1452 | 1.1935 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 1.0323 | 1.2419 |
B1 | 1.0484 | 1.0984 | 1.0806 | 0.9194 | 0.0000 | 1.1311 | 1.1452 | 1.1129 | 1.0323 | 1.1452 | 1.0645 | 1.0000 | 1.1129 | 1.1452 | 1.1452 |
B2 | 1.0645 | 1.1290 | 1.1129 | 1.0968 | 0.9839 | 0.0000 | 1.0645 | 1.0484 | 1.2419 | 1.0968 | 1.1935 | 0.9355 | 1.1290 | 1.1452 | 1.1129 |
B3 | 1.0984 | 1.0806 | 1.0323 | 0.9839 | 0.9032 | 0.9839 | 0.0000 | 1.1148 | 1.1774 | 1.0484 | 1.0000 | 0.9839 | 1.1129 | 1.2419 | 1.0645 |
B4 | 1.0645 | 1.0968 | 1.1613 | 1.0968 | 1.0806 | 1.1290 | 1.1129 | 0.0000 | 1.0806 | 1.1129 | 1.0806 | 0.9516 | 1.0161 | 1.1290 | 1.3871 |
C1 | 1.1129 | 1.1129 | 1.0161 | 1.1129 | 1.0161 | 1.0806 | 1.1935 | 1.1290 | 0.0000 | 1.0645 | 1.0806 | 1.0820 | 1.0968 | 1.1667 | 1.1129 |
C2 | 1.0806 | 0.9839 | 1.1452 | 1.1935 | 1.0806 | 1.0000 | 1.0806 | 1.1452 | 1.1639 | 0.0000 | 1.1290 | 1.0968 | 0.9839 | 1.1613 | 1.0806 |
C3 | 1.0000 | 0.8548 | 1.0000 | 1.0161 | 1.1129 | 0.8871 | 0.9839 | 1.0323 | 1.2097 | 1.0484 | 0.0000 | 1.0656 | 1.0161 | 1.1129 | 1.0645 |
D1 | 1.0806 | 1.1935 | 0.9355 | 1.0806 | 0.9016 | 1.0323 | 1.0806 | 1.0645 | 1.0806 | 1.1774 | 0.9344 | 0.0000 | 1.0161 | 1.0323 | 0.8871 |
D2 | 0.8871 | 0.9194 | 0.9355 | 0.9677 | 1.0968 | 1.0000 | 1.0806 | 0.9839 | 1.0645 | 0.9839 | 0.9355 | 0.9836 | 0.0000 | 1.0492 | 0.9355 |
D3 | 1.0968 | 1.0806 | 1.0484 | 0.8871 | 1.1129 | 0.9344 | 1.0968 | 1.1129 | 0.9194 | 1.0161 | 1.1452 | 0.9180 | 1.0984 | 0.0000 | 1.0484 |
D4 | 1.0656 | 1.0984 | 1.0484 | 0.9355 | 0.9355 | 1.1290 | 1.1290 | 0.8871 | 1.1452 | 1.1290 | 0.8871 | 0.9677 | 1.0323 | 1.0820 | 0.0000 |
Criteria | A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | B1 | B2 | B3 | B4 | C1 | C2 | C3 | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | 1.1293 | 1.2073 | 1.2010 | 1.1654 | 1.1719 | 1.1945 | 1.2451 | 1.2069 | 1.2507 | 1.2364 | 1.1993 | 1.1600 | 1.1878 | 1.2653 | 1.2521 |
A2 | 1.2069 | 1.1506 | 1.2099 | 1.1811 | 1.1842 | 1.2096 | 1.2524 | 1.2194 | 1.2538 | 1.2482 | 1.2082 | 1.1746 | 1.1973 | 1.2745 | 1.2558 |
A3 | 1.1412 | 1.1524 | 1.0836 | 1.1195 | 1.1131 | 1.1402 | 1.1894 | 1.1502 | 1.1834 | 1.1829 | 1.1420 | 1.1178 | 1.1290 | 1.1988 | 1.1872 |
A4 | 1.1609 | 1.1811 | 1.1834 | 1.0819 | 1.1421 | 1.1652 | 1.2155 | 1.1861 | 1.2212 | 1.2115 | 1.1787 | 1.1332 | 1.1583 | 1.2289 | 1.2259 |
B1 | 1.1528 | 1.1668 | 1.1616 | 1.1234 | 1.0689 | 1.1563 | 1.2042 | 1.1699 | 1.2009 | 1.1976 | 1.1581 | 1.1200 | 1.1513 | 1.2210 | 1.2065 |
B2 | 1.1656 | 1.1805 | 1.1754 | 1.1450 | 1.1391 | 1.1017 | 1.2122 | 1.1785 | 1.2250 | 1.2072 | 1.1774 | 1.1281 | 1.1641 | 1.2336 | 1.2173 |
B3 | 1.1318 | 1.1419 | 1.1350 | 1.1037 | 1.0996 | 1.1245 | 1.1123 | 1.1460 | 1.1840 | 1.1676 | 1.1308 | 1.0960 | 1.1277 | 1.2013 | 1.1773 |
B4 | 1.1755 | 1.1888 | 1.1881 | 1.1545 | 1.1539 | 1.1781 | 1.2252 | 1.1264 | 1.2264 | 1.2184 | 1.1809 | 1.1385 | 1.1676 | 1.2431 | 1.2427 |
C1 | 1.1699 | 1.1813 | 1.1717 | 1.1474 | 1.1423 | 1.1670 | 1.2210 | 1.1845 | 1.1540 | 1.2072 | 1.1726 | 1.1376 | 1.1639 | 1.2365 | 1.2189 |
C2 | 1.1647 | 1.1709 | 1.1755 | 1.1486 | 1.1426 | 1.1592 | 1.2113 | 1.1821 | 1.2188 | 1.1410 | 1.1720 | 1.1353 | 1.1543 | 1.2326 | 1.2137 |
C3 | 1.0972 | 1.1000 | 1.1039 | 1.0770 | 1.0826 | 1.0900 | 1.1403 | 1.1120 | 1.1554 | 1.1375 | 1.0423 | 1.0723 | 1.0934 | 1.1633 | 1.1469 |
D1 | 1.1105 | 1.1275 | 1.1092 | 1.0893 | 1.0795 | 1.1068 | 1.1546 | 1.1228 | 1.1575 | 1.1537 | 1.1068 | 1.0179 | 1.1020 | 1.1682 | 1.1463 |
D2 | 1.0520 | 1.0642 | 1.0611 | 1.0361 | 1.0435 | 1.0573 | 1.1050 | 1.0699 | 1.1067 | 1.0935 | 1.0588 | 1.0297 | 0.9945 | 1.1186 | 1.0990 |
D3 | 1.1105 | 1.1203 | 1.1145 | 1.0775 | 1.0905 | 1.1005 | 1.1547 | 1.1244 | 1.1477 | 1.1439 | 1.1174 | 1.0718 | 1.1058 | 1.1062 | 1.1543 |
D4 | 1.1069 | 1.1195 | 1.1126 | 1.0784 | 1.0785 | 1.1094 | 1.1545 | 1.1100 | 1.1582 | 1.1481 | 1.1013 | 1.0727 | 1.1002 | 1.1680 | 1.0902 |
D | R | D + R | D − R | RANK | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | 18.0731 | 17.0757 | 35.1488 | 0.9974 | 4 |
A2 | 18.2264 | 17.2529 | 35.4792 | 0.9735 | 2 |
A3 | 17.2307 | 17.1864 | 34.4171 | 0.0443 | 10 |
A4 | 17.6739 | 16.7289 | 34.4028 | 0.9450 | 11 |
B1 | 17.4594 | 16.7323 | 34.1916 | 0.7271 | 12 |
B2 | 17.6506 | 17.0603 | 34.7109 | 0.5903 | 8 |
B3 | 17.0795 | 17.7975 | 34.8770 | –0.7180 | 6 |
B4 | 17.8079 | 17.2889 | 35.0968 | 0.5190 | 5 |
C1 | 17.6758 | 17.8436 | 35.5193 | –0.1678 | 1 |
C2 | 17.6225 | 17.6947 | 35.3172 | –0.0721 | 3 |
C3 | 16.6140 | 17.1465 | 33.7605 | –0.5326 | 13 |
D1 | 16.7528 | 16.6056 | 33.3584 | 0.1472 | 14 |
D2 | 15.9898 | 16.9971 | 32.9869 | –1.0074 | 15 |
D3 | 16.7398 | 18.0599 | 34.7997 | –1.3202 | 7 |
D4 | 16.7084 | 17.8341 | 34.5425 | –1.1257 | 9 |
W | A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | B1 | B2 | B3 | B4 | C1 | C2 | C3 | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 | 0.0697 |
A2 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 | 0.0703 |
A3 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0664 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 | 0.0665 |
A4 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0682 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 |
B1 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 | 0.0673 |
B2 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 | 0.0681 |
B3 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 | 0.0659 |
B4 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 | 0.0687 |
C1 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 | 0.0682 |
C2 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 | 0.0680 |
C3 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 | 0.0641 |
D1 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 |
D2 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 | 0.0617 |
D3 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 | 0.0646 |
D4 | 0.0644 | 0.0644 | 0.0644 | 0.0645 | 0.0645 | 0.0644 | 0.0644 | 0.0645 | 0.0644 | 0.0644 | 0.0645 | 0.0645 | 0.0644 | 0.0644 | 0.0645 |
DEMATEL | ANP | Borda Score | Overall Ranking | |
---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 3 |
A2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
A3 | 10 | 9 | 19 | 9 |
A4 | 11 | 5 | 16 | 7 |
B1 | 12 | 8 | 20 | 11 |
B2 | 8 | 6 | 14 | 6 |
B3 | 6 | 10 | 16 | 7 |
B4 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 4 |
C1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 2 |
C2 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 5 |
C3 | 13 | 14 | 27 | 14 |
D1 | 14 | 11 | 25 | 13 |
D2 | 15 | 15 | 30 | 15 |
D3 | 7 | 12 | 19 | 9 |
D4 | 9 | 13 | 22 | 12 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lu, Y.; Jin, C.; Qiu, J.; Jiang, P. Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Technique to Identify Key Factors Influencing Microblog Users’ Diffusion Behaviors in Emergencies: Evidence from Generations Born after 2000. Symmetry 2019, 11, 265. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020265
Lu Y, Jin C, Qiu J, Jiang P. Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Technique to Identify Key Factors Influencing Microblog Users’ Diffusion Behaviors in Emergencies: Evidence from Generations Born after 2000. Symmetry. 2019; 11(2):265. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020265
Chicago/Turabian StyleLu, Yanxia, Chun Jin, Jiangnan Qiu, and Peng Jiang. 2019. "Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Technique to Identify Key Factors Influencing Microblog Users’ Diffusion Behaviors in Emergencies: Evidence from Generations Born after 2000" Symmetry 11, no. 2: 265. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020265
APA StyleLu, Y., Jin, C., Qiu, J., & Jiang, P. (2019). Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Technique to Identify Key Factors Influencing Microblog Users’ Diffusion Behaviors in Emergencies: Evidence from Generations Born after 2000. Symmetry, 11(2), 265. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11020265