nach oben

vorheriges Kapitel Bionic Hand Control in Real-Time Based on Elect...

nächstes Kapitel Biological Regulation and Psychological Mechani...

Tipp

Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Dynamic Decision Support in the Internet Marketing Management

Erstes Kapitel lesen

Autoren: Paweł Ziemba, Jarosław Jankowski, Jarosław Wątróbski

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Erschienen in: Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence XXIX

» Jetzt Zugang zum Volltext erhalten

Abstract

The article deals with the problem of selecting an advertisement variant on the basis of dynamically-changing values of evaluation criteria. Therefore, a framework, used in an online environment, of a dynamic multi-criteria decision analysis (DMCDA) has been prepared. The framework was based on the PROMETHEE method which makes it possible to carry out a very detailed analysis of a decision process and obtained solutions. While applying the prepared framework, a number of ad variants were considered on the basis of the data collected during a subjective study and a field experiment. In the course of solving the decision problem, the advertiser’s and website operator’s perspectives as well as two aggregation strategies of dynamic data were considered. As a result, the following was obtained: partial rankings of variants, global rankings considering the advertiser’s and publisher’s points of view, GDSS rankings pointing to compromise solutions by merging the two points of view. The obtained solutions were verified by means of: examining correlation coefficients, a GAIA analysis and an analysis of ranking robustness to preference changes. The end result was that the most satisfying advertiser and publisher were determined.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Jetzt einloggen Kostenlos registrieren

Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 69.000 Bücher
über 500 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Umwelt
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 50.000 Bücher
über 380 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Umwelt
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 58.000 Bücher
über 300 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Jetzt informieren

See Table 8

Table 8.

PROMETHEE GDSS rankings

Decision variant	TPEA		TPDA		Decision variant	TPEA		TPDA
Decision variant	Φ _global	Rank	Φ _global	Rank	Decision variant	Φ _global	Rank	Φ _global	Rank
A1.1	0.0766	9	0.0633	12	A3.6	−0.0596	39	−0.0498	37
A1.2	0.0561	14	0.0446	16	A3.7	0.0683	10	0.0774	10
A1.3	0.1727	1	0.1636	2	A3.8	0.0527	15	0.0731	11
A1.4	−0.1371	49	−0.1562	50	A3.9	0.0162	21	0.0275	18
A1.5	−0.0389	34	−0.0572	39	A3.10	−0.0406	36	−0.0197	28
A1.6	−0.0328	33	−0.0481	36	A4.1	0.0594	12	0.0628	13
A1.7	0.0588	13	0.0493	15	A4.2	0.0236	19	0.0309	17
A1.8	−0.0165	28	−0.0371	34	A4.3	0.0597	11	0.0825	9
A1.9	0.0041	23	−0.0237	30	A4.4	−0.1450	50	−0.1458	49
A1.10	0.0279	18	0.0153	20	A4.5	−0.0415	37	−0.0325	31
A2.1	0.1166	4	0.0938	6	A4.6	−0.0509	38	−0.0387	35
A2.2	0.0371	17	0.0125	22	A4.7	0.0095	22	0.0147	21
A2.3	0.1139	5	0.1009	5	A4.8	−0.0402	35	−0.0333	32
A2.4	−0.0799	43	−0.0839	43	A4.9	−0.0221	30	−0.0206	29
A2.5	−0.0989	46	−0.1231	47	A4.10	−0.0974	45	−0.0801	42
A2.6	−0.1282	48	−0.1353	48	A5.1	0.0802	7	0.0912	7
A2.7	−0.0275	31	−0.0509	38	A5.2	0.0467	16	0.0498	14
A2.8	−0.0784	42	−0.0897	45	A5.3	0.0773	8	0.0894	8
A2.9	−0.0160	26	−0.0369	33	A5.4	−0.0193	29	0.0031	24
A2.10	0.0025	24	−0.0053	25	A5.5	−0.0624	40	−0.0572	40
A3.1	0.1515	2	0.1691	1	A5.6	−0.1222	47	−0.1215	46
A3.2	0.0934	6	0.1117	4	A5.7	0.0217	20	0.0245	19
A3.3	0.1512	3	0.1570	3	A5.8	−0.0947	44	−0.0866	44
A3.4	−0.0318	32	−0.0163	27	A5.9	−0.0653	41	−0.0615	41
A3.5	−0.0147	25	0.0117	23	A5.10	−0.0160	27	−0.0088	26

. See Table 9.

Table 9.

Values of variants for individual criteria

Decision variant	CTR [%]				AC/PP [$]				IoA
Decision variant	p ₁	p ₂	p ₃	p ₄	p ₁	p ₂	p ₃	p ₄	p ₁–p ₄
A1.1	0.15	0.08	0.08	0.27	0.50	0.25	0.45	0.80	0.0026
A1.2	0.10	0.26	0.11	0.24	0.40	0.50	0.70	0.60	0.2584
A1.3	0.24	0.33	0.20	0.56	1.50	1.65	1.50	2.25	0.1843
A1.4	0.18	0.06	0.04	0.28	1.40	0.40	0.60	1.40	0.8474
A1.5	0.27	0.13	0.14	0.34	2.75	1.25	2.75	2.50	0.7028
A1.6	0.21	0.26	0.21	0.32	2.70	3.30	4.50	3.00	0.8386
A1.7	0.17	0.28	0.15	0.44	2.45	2.80	2.80	3.85	0.4392
A1.8	0.21	0.17	0.14	0.22	3.60	1.60	4.80	2.40	0.5785
A1.9	0.33	0.14	0.12	0.23	6.30	4.05	6.75	3.15	0.5
A1.10	0.22	0.38	0.12	0.60	4.50	4.50	4.00	7.50	0.6481
A2.1	0.12	0.34	0.11	0.11	0.60	0.40	0.50	0.35	0.0053
A2.2	0.22	0.15	0.12	0.17	1.20	0.60	0.80	1.30	0.3413
A2.3	0.11	0.33	0.19	0.16	0.90	1.65	2.40	1.95	0.1799
A2.4	0.13	0.17	0.13	0.38	1.40	0.80	1.60	3.00	0.7989
A2.5	0.15	0.21	0.06	0.15	2.00	1.50	0.75	1.50	0.7434
A2.6	0.11	0.14	0.13	0.23	1.80	1.80	2.70	4.20	0.9259
A2.7	0.19	0.14	0.12	0.12	3.85	2.80	4.55	4.20	0.5317
A2.8	0.13	0.08	0.08	0.25	2.80	0.80	2.00	4.00	0.6138
A2.9	0.16	0.11	0.06	0.18	4.05	2.25	1.80	4.95	0.3889
A2.10	0.11	0.22	0.13	0.28	3.00	3.00	3.50	5.00	0.4709
A3.1	0.01	0.33	0.19	0.53	0.05	0.80	0.80	0.70	0.0106
A3.2	0.01	0.36	0.15	0.62	0.10	1.20	0.90	1.00	0.291
A3.3	0.12	0.38	0.14	0.70	1.20	2.55	1.05	1.65	0.1693
A3.4	0.03	0.32	0.18	0.54	0.40	2.60	1.60	1.40	0.7566
A3.5	0.07	0.22	0.16	0.90	1.25	2.50	2.50	5.00	0.7063
A3.6	0.01	0.36	0.26	0.35	0.30	3.30	4.50	1.50	0.8836
A3.7	0.04	0.36	0.13	0.54	1.05	3.85	2.80	3.15	0.3519
A3.8	0.01	0.47	0.16	0.70	0.40	6.00	3.60	3.20	0.5053
A3.9	0.09	0.27	0.18	0.58	2.70	4.05	4.50	4.05	0.5952
A3.10	0.01	0.34	0.10	0.77	0.50	5.50	3.00	5.00	0.7302
A4.1	0.01	0.17	0.08	0.28	0.10	1.10	1.10	0.90	0.0053
A4.2	0.03	0.16	0.12	0.34	0.40	0.90	1.30	0.80	0.2937
A4.3	0.03	0.13	0.05	0.77	0.60	1.05	0.75	2.70	0.1455
A4.4	0.02	0.17	0.07	0.23	0.60	2.20	1.40	1.20	0.8201
A4.5	0.05	0.24	0.03	0.62	1.50	2.50	0.75	3.50	0.5608
A4.6	0.02	0.34	0.16	0.49	0.90	2.40	2.70	3.00	0.7989
A4.7	0.02	0.29	0.10	0.41	0.70	4.55	4.20	4.55	0.418
A4.8	0.02	0.23	0.11	0.38	0.80	5.60	4.40	4.80	0.5556
A4.9	0.06	0.34	0.09	0.49	3.60	4.50	5.85	4.95	0.6032
A4.10	0.05	0.17	0.07	0.69	3.00	3.00	4.00	8.00	0.7989
A5.1	0.01	0.19	0.09	0.44	0.05	1.00	0.95	0.80	0.0026
A5.2	0.11	0.19	0.08	0.56	0.70	1.10	0.90	0.90	0.3042
A5.3	0.07	0.21	0.08	0.65	0.60	2.10	1.20	1.50	0.1852
A5.4	0.10	0.21	0.11	1.22	1.20	3.20	3.00	4.80	0.6905
A5.5	0.07	0.18	0.12	0.42	1.00	2.50	3.25	1.75	0.672
A5.6	0.05	0.22	0.08	0.37	0.90	3.60	2.70	1.80	0.8571
A5.7	0.07	0.19	0.13	0.36	1.40	4.55	4.55	2.10	0.373
A5.8	0.02	0.17	0.07	0.42	0.40	4.00	3.20	2.80	0.672
A5.9	0.02	0.20	0.08	0.34	0.45	5.85	3.60	2.25	0.5714
A5.10	0.15	0.23	0.09	0.83	4.50	6.50	5.00	6.50	0.672

See Tables 10 and 11.

Table 10.

Rankings of variants for subsequent time periods – advertiser’s perspective

Decision variant	p ₁		p ₂		p ₃		p ₄
Decision variant	Φ _net	Rank	Φ _net	Rank	Φ _net	Rank	Φ _net	Rank
A1.1	0.4232	1	0.1272	13	0.2379	11	0.2225	9
A1.2	0.2458	5	0.3735	7	0.2715	9	0.1507	14
A1.3	0.4182	2	0.4166	5	0.5472	2	0.2811	8
A1.4	0.1104	13	−0.182	38	−0.1859	38	−0.093	33
A1.5	0.0975	14	−0.1183	31	0.0067	24	−0.116	35
A1.6	−0.0157	25	−0.1371	34	−0.0064	25	−0.2268	42
A1.7	0.0794	16	0.0987	17	0.136	14	−0.0818	31
A1.8	−0.0405	27	−0.0439	27	−0.1786	37	−0.1593	36
A1.9	−0.0098	21	−0.3561	48	−0.3546	47	−0.2029	40
A1.10	−0.1081	37	0.0076	22	−0.2152	40	−0.2735	44
A2.1	0.3354	4	0.6042	1	0.3552	6	0.1432	15
A2.2	0.3798	3	0.1103	16	0.2768	8	0.0073	22
A2.3	0.2315	6	0.4179	4	0.4124	4	−0.0153	23
A2.4	0.0025	20	−0.0312	25	0.0747	19	−0.165	37
A2.5	−0.0137	24	−0.0054	24	−0.1029	30	−0.1708	38
A2.6	−0.1371	40	−0.2276	42	−0.094	29	−0.4509	50
A2.7	−0.0789	31	−0.219	41	−0.2274	41	−0.4069	49
A2.8	−0.1334	39	−0.1184	32	−0.1234	31	−0.3193	46
A2.9	−0.105	36	−0.1473	35	−0.0917	28	−0.3838	48
A2.10	−0.1591	43	−0.0615	28	−0.0476	27	−0.3426	47
A3.1	0.1461	11	0.548	2	0.6352	1	0.4497	2
A3.2	0.0655	18	0.4844	3	0.4127	3	0.425	4
A3.3	0.2202	7	0.3992	6	0.3937	5	0.4595	1
A3.4	−0.094	33	0.092	19	0.2807	7	0.1544	13
A3.5	−0.0963	34	−0.0847	30	0.118	16	0.031	21
A3.6	−0.1607	45	0.0414	20	0.0394	23	−0.056	27
A3.7	−0.0109	22	0.1552	10	0.0844	18	0.1131	17
A3.8	−0.0509	28	0.0312	21	0.051	22	0.1784	12
A3.9	−0.2119	47	−0.1273	33	−0.0085	26	−0.0392	24
A3.10	−0.1407	41	−0.161	37	−0.2055	39	−0.04	25
A4.1	0.1412	12	0.1922	9	0.1744	13	0.2213	10
A4.2	0.0702	17	0.1168	15	0.2431	10	0.2024	11
A4.3	0.0907	15	0.0949	18	0.068	20	0.3997	5
A4.4	−0.1592	44	−0.1885	40	−0.1567	36	−0.1052	34
A4.5	−0.1275	38	0.0069	23	−0.1353	34	0.0651	18
A4.6	−0.1908	46	0.139	12	0.065	21	−0.0704	30
A4.7	−0.034	26	−0.0717	29	−0.2385	42	−0.1734	39
A4.8	−0.0983	35	−0.3285	46	−0.2663	43	−0.2738	45
A4.9	−0.3953	49	−0.0389	26	−0.4756	50	−0.209	41
A4.10	−0.4148	50	−0.2764	45	−0.4683	49	−0.266	43
A5.1	0.1476	10	0.2431	8	0.2291	12	0.3641	7
A5.2	0.2178	8	0.1523	11	0.1143	17	0.3791	6
A5.3	0.1704	9	0.1225	14	0.1217	15	0.4335	3
A5.4	−0.0113	23	−0.1844	39	−0.15	35	0.1228	16
A5.5	−0.0516	29	−0.1565	36	−0.1314	33	0.0408	20
A5.6	−0.1422	42	−0.2628	44	−0.2855	44	−0.0637	28
A5.7	0.0034	19	−0.2623	43	−0.1239	32	0.0614	19
A5.8	−0.0883	32	−0.3559	47	−0.3301	46	−0.0696	29
A5.9	−0.0602	30	−0.4132	49	−0.3068	45	−0.0451	26
A5.10	−0.2566	48	−0.4153	50	−0.4389	48	−0.0869	32

Table 11.

Rankings of variants for subsequent time periods – publisher’s perspective

Decision variant	p ₁		p ₂		p ₃		p ₄
Decision variant	Φ _net	Rank	Φ _net	Rank	Φ _net	Rank	Φ _net	Rank
A1.1	0.2396	10	−0.0775	31	−0.005	27	0.0332	25
A1.2	0.0344	24	−0.0183	25	−0.0508	30	−0.1268	34
A1.3	0.3682	4	0.2151	13	0.246	5	0.2154	9
A1.4	−0.1442	35	−0.614	50	−0.5979	50	−0.4438	49
A1.5	0.1978	14	−0.3915	46	−0.0691	32	−0.2164	42
A1.6	0.0688	19	−0.109	36	0.166	15	−0.2542	44
A1.7	0.266	8	0.1206	19	0.1454	17	0.1576	16
A1.8	0.3439	6	−0.2328	43	0.2429	6	−0.1904	39
A1.9	0.5807	1	0.0822	21	0.375	1	−0.0503	31
A1.10	0.3633	5	0.2535	7	0.0791	20	0.331	3
A2.1	0.2135	12	0.1806	15	0.06	22	−0.0646	32
A2.2	0.2112	13	−0.1792	40	−0.0771	33	−0.1477	36
A2.3	0.1569	15	0.2176	12	0.3438	3	0.0218	26
A2.4	−0.1771	37	−0.461	49	−0.2898	45	−0.2059	40
A2.5	−0.0354	29	−0.3127	44	−0.489	49	−0.4206	47
A2.6	−0.2167	39	−0.4513	48	−0.2253	43	−0.2073	41
A2.7	0.3804	3	−0.0909	34	0.2118	10	−0.0007	28
A2.8	0.1382	17	−0.4149	47	−0.2266	44	−0.0318	30
A2.9	0.4701	2	−0.0705	30	−0.1235	39	0.2014	10
A2.10	0.2434	9	0.0585	23	0.1664	14	0.1819	13
A3.1	0.0164	27	0.2076	14	0.241	7	0.1315	19
A3.2	−0.1272	33	0.1243	18	0.0325	24	0.0467	23
A3.3	0.2149	11	0.3647	3	0.1022	18	0.2166	8
A3.4	−0.3995	48	−0.0844	33	−0.1676	42	−0.2798	45
A3.5	−0.2142	38	−0.167	39	−0.0615	31	0.2443	6
A3.6	−0.5065	50	−0.0382	27	0.1704	12	−0.4243	48
A3.7	−0.0198	28	0.3881	2	0.1689	13	0.1915	12
A3.8	−0.2498	42	0.506	1	0.2151	9	0.1454	17
A3.9	0.0873	18	0.1454	16	0.2816	4	0.1258	20
A3.10	−0.3923	47	0.2474	9	−0.1417	41	0.1975	11
A4.1	0.0242	25	0.0765	22	0.0571	23	0.045	24
A4.2	−0.0711	31	−0.1064	35	0.0075	25	−0.0925	33
A4.3	0.044	23	−0.0269	26	−0.0954	36	0.3619	1
A4.4	−0.4237	49	−0.3226	45	−0.45	48	−0.4676	50
A4.5	−0.105	32	−0.047	28	−0.4136	47	0.1065	21
A4.6	−0.3732	45	−0.1151	37	−0.0937	34	−0.1586	38
A4.7	−0.1361	34	0.3454	4	0.2229	8	0.235	7
A4.8	−0.2269	41	0.2622	6	0.1595	16	0.142	18
A4.9	0.1539	16	0.2532	8	0.195	11	0.1703	15
A4.10	−0.0514	30	−0.2158	42	−0.1196	37	0.2846	4
A5.1	0.0193	26	0.0876	20	0.0624	21	0.104	22
A5.2	0.0529	21	−0.0638	29	−0.1235	38	0.0035	27
A5.3	0.0672	20	0.1423	17	−0.0177	28	0.173	14
A5.4	−0.1739	36	−0.0831	32	−0.0946	35	0.2713	5
A5.5	−0.2243	40	−0.1856	41	−0.0292	29	−0.2407	43
A5.6	−0.374	46	−0.1242	38	−0.294	46	−0.37	46
A5.7	0.0458	22	0.2755	5	0.3536	2	−0.0127	29
A5.8	−0.356	44	−0.0165	24	−0.1379	40	−0.1303	35
A5.9	−0.2811	43	0.2359	10	0.0002	26	−0.1533	37
A5.10	0.2769	7	0.2298	11	0.0879	19	0.3515	2

See Table 12.

Table 12.

Global rankings of variants –TPEA and TPDA strategies

Decision variant	Advertiser’s perspective				Publisher’s perspective
	TPEA		TPDA		TPEA		TPDA
	$ \Phi _{\text{global}}^{\text{DM1}} $	Rank	$ \Phi _{\text{global}}^{\text{DM1}} $	Rank	$ \Phi _{\text{global}}^{\text{DM2}} $	Rank	$ \Phi _{\text{global}}^{\text{DM2}} $	Rank
A1.1	0.2527	8	0.2281	10	0.0476	24	0.0202	29
A1.2	0.2604	7	0.2410	8	−0.0404	32	−0.0662	34
A1.3	0.4158	2	0.4017	3	0.2612	1	0.2398	3
A1.4	−0.0876	30	−0.1183	31	−0.4500	50	−0.4941	50
A1.5	−0.0325	23	−0.0583	26	−0.1198	38	−0.1658	42
A1.6	−0.0965	31	−0.1216	32	−0.0321	30	−0.0668	35
A1.7	0.0581	18	0.0358	19	0.1724	9	0.1574	15
A1.8	−0.1056	33	−0.1301	34	0.0409	25	−0.0155	30
A1.9	−0.2309	45	−0.2597	44	0.2469	3	0.1669	12
A1.10	−0.1473	36	−0.1833	39	0.2567	2	0.2432	1
A2.1	0.3595	4	0.3182	5	0.0974	18	0.0496	23
A2.2	0.1936	12	0.1460	16	−0.0482	33	−0.0969	36
A2.3	0.2616	6	0.2243	11	0.1850	7	0.1711	10
A2.4	−0.0298	22	−0.0496	25	−0.2835	46	−0.2792	46
A2.5	−0.0732	27	−0.1016	30	−0.3144	48	−0.3810	48
A2.6	−0.2274	44	−0.2678	46	−0.2752	45	−0.2624	45
A2.7	−0.2331	46	−0.2827	49	0.1252	16	0.0831	19
A2.8	−0.1736	39	−0.2018	41	−0.1338	39	−0.1499	39
A2.9	−0.1820	40	−0.2210	43	0.1194	17	0.0764	21
A2.10	−0.1527	38	−0.1795	38	0.1626	12	0.1587	14
A3.1	0.4448	1	0.4947	1	0.1491	15	0.1681	11
A3.2	0.3469	5	0.3972	4	0.0191	26	0.0406	26
A3.3	0.3682	3	0.4038	2	0.2246	5	0.2117	5
A3.4	0.1083	16	0.1550	15	−0.2328	44	−0.2190	44
A3.5	−0.0080	20	0.0212	20	−0.0496	35	0.0245	28
A3.6	−0.0340	24	−0.0184	22	−0.1997	43	−0.1769	43
A3.7	0.0855	17	0.1005	17	0.1822	8	0.2029	6
A3.8	0.0524	19	0.0878	18	0.1542	14	0.1989	7
A3.9	−0.0967	32	−0.0649	29	0.1600	13	0.1726	9
A3.10	−0.1368	35	−0.1239	33	−0.0223	28	0.0467	24
A4.1	0.1823	13	0.1934	13	0.0507	23	0.0529	22
A4.2	0.1581	15	0.1843	14	−0.0656	36	−0.0631	33
A4.3	0.1633	14	0.2083	12	0.0709	21	0.1152	17
A4.4	−0.1524	37	−0.1427	35	−0.4160	49	−0.4289	49
A4.5	−0.0477	25	−0.0259	23	−0.1148	37	−0.1014	37
A4.6	−0.0143	21	0.0001	21	−0.1852	42	−0.1519	40
A4.7	−0.1294	34	−0.1587	36	0.1668	10	0.2163	4
A4.8	−0.2417	47	−0.2649	45	0.0842	20	0.1344	16
A4.9	−0.2797	48	−0.2736	47	0.1931	6	0.1927	8
A4.10	−0.3564	50	−0.3437	50	−0.0256	29	0.0297	27
A5.1	0.2460	9	0.2778	6	0.0683	22	0.0798	20
A5.2	0.2159	10	0.2382	9	−0.0327	31	−0.0431	32
A5.3	0.2120	11	0.2515	7	0.0912	19	0.0991	18
A5.4	−0.0557	26	−0.0339	24	−0.0201	27	0.0461	25
A5.5	−0.0747	28	−0.0596	27	−0.1700	41	−0.1646	41
A5.6	−0.1886	41	−0.1779	37	−0.2906	47	−0.2984	47
A5.7	−0.0804	29	−0.0647	28	0.1656	11	0.1607	13
A5.8	−0.2110	43	−0.2069	42	−0.1602	40	−0.1324	38
A5.9	−0.2063	42	−0.1987	40	−0.0496	34	−0.0422	31
A5.10	−0.2994	49	−0.2752	48	0.2365	4	0.2406	2

Du, H., Xu, Y.: Research on multi-objective optimization decision model of web advertising - takes recruitment advertisement as an example. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Technol. 4(10), 329–336 (2012)

Langheinrich, M., Nakamura, A., Abe, N., Kamba, T., Koseki, Y.: Unintrusive customization techniques for web advertising. Comput. Netw. 31(11–16), 1259–1272 (1999) CrossRef

Kazienko, P., Adamski, M.: AdROSA - adaptive personalization of web advertising. Inf. Sci. 177(11), 2269–2295 (2007) CrossRef

Chickering, D.M., Heckerman, D.: Targeted advertising with inventory management. In: Proceedings of 2nd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 145–149 (2000)

Nakamura, A., Abe, N.: Improvements to the linear programming based scheduling of web advertisements. Electron. Commer. Res. 5, 75–98 (2005) CrossRef

Zha, W., Wu, H.D.: The impact of online disruptive ads on users’ comprehension, evaluation of site credibility, and sentiment of intrusiveness. Am. Commun. J. 16(2), 15–28 (2014)

Goldstein, D.G., McAfee, R.P., Suri, S.: The cost of annoying ads. In: Proceedings of 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 459–470 (2013)

Brajnik, G., Gabrielli, S.: A review of online advertising effects on the user experience. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 26(10), 971–997 (2010) CrossRef

Kelly, L., Kerr, G., Drennan, J.: Avoidance of advertising in social networking sites. The teenage perspective. J. Interact. Advert. 10(2), 16–27 (2010) CrossRef

10.

Jankowski, J., Ziemba, P., Wątróbski, J., Kazienko, P.: Towards the tradeoff between online marketing resources exploitation and the user experience with the use of eye tracking. In: Nguyen, N.T., Trawiński, B., Fujita, H., Hong, T.-P. (eds.) ACIIDS 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9621, pp. 330–343. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49381-6_32 CrossRef

11.

Jankowski, J., Wątróbski, J., Ziemba, P.: Modeling the impact of visual components on verbal communication in online advertising. In: Núñez, M., Nguyen, N.T., Camacho, D., Trawiński, B. (eds.) ICCCI 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9330, pp. 44–53. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24306-1_5 CrossRef

12.

Jankowski, J., Wątróbski, J., Ziemba, P.: Dynamic MCDA approach to multilevel decision support in online environment. In: Nguyen, N.-T., Manolopoulos, Y., Iliadis, L., Trawiński, B. (eds.) ICCCI 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9875, pp. 553–564. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45243-2_51 CrossRef

13.

Campanella, G., Ribeiro, R.A.: A framework for dynamic multiple-criteria decision making. Decis. Support Syst. 52(1), 52–60 (2011) CrossRef

14.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Maknoon, R., Zavadskas, E.K.: An introduction to Prospective Multiple Attribute Decision Making (PMADM). Technolog. Econ. Dev. Econ. 22(2), 309–326 (2016) CrossRef

15.

Novak, T.P., Hoffman, D.L.: New metrics for new media: toward the development of web measurement standards. World Wide Web J. 2(1), 213–246 (1997)

16.

Pavlou, P.A., Stewart, D.W.: Measuring the effects and effectiveness of interactive advertising: a research agenda. J. Interact. Advert. 1(1), 61–77 (2000) CrossRef

17.

Hoffman, D.L., Novak, T.P.: When exposure-based advertising stops making sense (And what CDNOW did about it). http://yaffecenter.org/downloads/Complete_List_of_Working_Papers/cdnow.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2017

18.

Wu, G.: Applying the Rossiter-Percy grid to online advertising planning. The role of product/brand type in previsit intentions. J. Interact. Advert. 8(1), 15–22 (2007) CrossRef

19.

Kim, C., Park, S., Kwon, K., Chang, W.: How to select search keywords for online advertising depending on consumer involvement: an empirical investigation. Expert Syst. Appl. 39(1), 594–610 (2012) CrossRef

20.

Chakrabarti, D., Kumar, R., Radlinski, F., Upfal, E.: Mortal multi-armed bandits. In: Koller, D., Schuurmans, D., Bengio, Y. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 21, pp. 273–280 (2008)

21.

Chakrabarti, D., Agarwal, D., Josifovski, V.: Contextual advertising by combining relevance with click feedback. In: Proceeding of 17th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 417–426 (2008)

22.

Fan, T.K., Chang, C.H.: Blogger-centric contextual advertising. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(3), 1777–1788 (2011) CrossRef

23.

Amiri, A., Menon, S.: Efficient scheduling of internet banner advertisements. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 3(4), 334–346 (2003) CrossRef

24.

Gupta, N., Khurana, U., Lee, T., Nawathe, S.: Optimizing display advertisements based on historic user trails. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGIR, Workshop: Internet Advertising (2011)

25.

Giuffrida, G., Reforgiato, D., Tribulato, G., Zarba, C.: A banner recommendation system based on web navigation history. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM), pp. 291–296 (2011)

26.

Urban, G.L., Liberali, G., MacDonald, E., Bordley, R., Hauser, J.R.: Morphing banner advertising. Mark. Sci. 33(1), 27–46 (2014) CrossRef

27.

Zorn, S., Olaru, D., Veheim, T., Zhao, S., Murphy, J.: Impact of animation and language on banner click-through rates. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 13(2), 173–183 (2012)

28.

Yoo, C.Y., Kim, K.: Processing of animation in online banner advertising: the roles of cognitive and emotional responses. J. Interact. Mark. 19(4), 18–34 (2005) CrossRef

29.

Lang, A.: The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. J. Commun. 50(1), 46–70 (2000) CrossRef

30.

Turatto, M., Galfano, G.: Color, form and luminance capture attention in visual search. Vis. Res. 40(13), 1639–1643 (2000) CrossRef

31.

Rosenkrans, G.: The creativeness and effectiveness of online interactive rich media advertising. J. Interact. Advert. 9(2), 18–31 (2009) CrossRef

32.

Yoo, C.Y., Kim, K., Stout, P.A.: Assessing the effects of animation in online banner advertising. hierarchy of effects model. J. Interact. Advert. 4(2), 49–60 (2004) CrossRef

33.

Ziemba, P., Jankowski, J., Wątróbski, J., Piwowarski, M.: Web projects evaluation using the method of significant website assessment criteria detection. In: Nguyen, N.T., Kowalczyk, R. (eds.) Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence XXII. LNCS, vol. 9655, pp. 167–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49619-0_9 CrossRef

34.

Ziemba, P., Wątróbski, J., Jankowski, J., Wolski, W.: Construction and restructuring of the knowledge repository of website evaluation methods. In: Ziemba, E. (ed.) Information Technology for Management. LNBIP, vol. 243, pp. 29–52. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30528-8_3 CrossRef

35.

Tsafarakis, S., Lakiotaki, K., Matsatsinis, N.: Applications of MCDA in marketing and e-Commerce. In: Zopounidis, C., Pardalos, P.M. (eds.) Handbook of Multicriteria Analysis, pp. 425–448. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92828-7_15 CrossRef

36.

Celik, M., Deha Er, I.: Fuzzy axiomatic design extension for managing model selection paradigm in decision science. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(3), 6477–6484 (2009) CrossRef

37.

Wątróbski, J., Jankowski, J., Ziemba, P.: Multistage performance modelling in digital marketing management. Econ. Sociol. 9(2), 101–125 (2016) CrossRef

38.

Wątróbski, J., Ziemba, P., Jankowski, J., Zioło, M.: Green energy for a green city - a multi-perspective model approach. Sustainability 8(8), 702 (2016) CrossRef

39.

Brans, J.P., Mareschal, B.: PROMETHEE methods. In: Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 78, pp. 163–195. Springer, Boston (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23081-5_5 CrossRef

40.

Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Chan, K.: A role for sensitivity analysis in presenting the results from MCDA studies to decision makers. J. Multi-Criter. Decis. Anal. 8, 139–145 (1999) CrossRef

41.

Mareschal, B., Brans, J.P.: Geometrical representations for MCDA. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 34, 69–77 (1988) MathSciNetCrossRef

42.

Yu, P.L., Chen, Y.C.: Dynamic MCDM, habitual domains and competence set analysis for effective decision making in changeable spaces. In: Ehrgott, M., Figueira, J.R., Greco, S. (eds.) Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 142, pp. 1–35. Springer, New York (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5904-1_1 CrossRef

43.

Zulueta, Y., Martell, V., Martínez, J., Martínez, L.: A dynamic multi-expert multi-criteria decision making model for risk analysis. In: Castro, F., Gelbukh, A., González, M. (eds.) MICAI 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8265, pp. 132–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45114-0_11 CrossRef

44.

Jassbi, J.J., Ribeiro, R.A., Varela, L.R.: Dynamic MCDM with future knowledge for supplier selection. J. Decis. Syst. 23(3), 232–248 (2014) CrossRef

45.

Chen, Y., Li, K.W., He, S.: Dynamic multiple criteria decision analysis with application in emergency management assessment. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems Man and Cybernetics (SMC), pp. 3513–3517 (2010)

46.

Agrell, P.J., Wikner, J.: An MCDM framework for dynamic systems. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 45(1–3), 279–292 (1996) CrossRef

47.

Kornbluth, J.S.H.: Dynamic multi-criteria decision making. J. Multi-Criter. Decis. Anal. 1(2), 81–92 (1992) CrossRef

48.

Guitouni, A., Martel, J.M., Vincke, P.: A framework to choose a discrete multicriterion aggregation procedure. Defence Research Establishment Valcatier (1998)

49.

Zenebe, A., Zhou, L., Norcio, F.: User preferences discovery using fuzzy models. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 161(23), 3044–3063 (2010) MathSciNetCrossRef

50.

Johnson, T.: The 2016 Amazon Average CPC by Category Report. http://www.cpcstrategy.com/blog/2016/09/2016-amazon-sponsored-products-average-winning-bids-by-category/. Accessed 21 May 2017

51.

Jankowski, J., Kazienko, P., Wątróbski, J., Lewandowska, A., Ziemba, P., Zioło, M.: Fuzzy multi-objective modeling of effectiveness and user experience in online advertising. Expert Syst. Appl. 65, 315–331 (2016) CrossRef

52.

Podvezko, V., Podviezko, A.: Dependence of multi-criteria evaluation result on choice of preference functions and their parameters. Technolog. Econ. Dev. Econ. 16(1), 143–158 (2010) CrossRef

53.

Deshmukh, S.C.: Preference ranking organization method of enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE). Int. J. Eng. Sci. Invent. 2(11), 28–34 (2013)

54.

Roy, B.: The outranking approach and the foundations of electre methods. In: Bana e Costa, C.A. (ed.) Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, pp. 155–183. Springer, Heidelberg (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75935-2_8 CrossRef

55.

Wątróbski, J., Ziemba, P., Jankowski, J., Wolski, W.: PEQUAL – e-Commerce websites quality evaluation methodology. In: Ganzha, M., Maciaszek, L., Paprzycki, M. (eds.) Proceedings of 2016 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. ACSIS, vol. 8, pp. 1317–1327 (2016). https://doi.org/10.15439/2016f46

56.

Chmielarz, W., Zborowski, M.: Aspects of mobility in e-Marketing from the perspective of a customer. In: Ganzha, M., Maciaszek, L., Paprzycki, M. (eds.) Proceedings of 2016 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. ACSIS, vol. 8, pp. 1329–1333 (2016). https://doi.org/10.15439/2016f46

57.

Ziemba, P., Wątróbski, J., Karczmarczyk, A., Jankowski, J., Wolski, W.: Integrated approach to e-commerce websites evaluation with the use of surveys and eye tracking based experiments. In: Proceedings of 2017 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. ACSIS, vol. 11, pp. 1019–1030 (2017). https://doi.org/10.15439/2017f320

Titel

Dynamic Decision Support in the Internet Marketing Management

Buch

Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence XXIX

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90286-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-90287-6

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90287-6

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90287-6_3

Autoren:

Paweł Ziemba
Jarosław Jankowski
Jarosław Wątróbski

Verlag

Springer International Publishing

Sequenznummer

Premium Partner

Bildnachweise