Comprehensive Evaluation of Distance-Based MCDM Methods Using Response to Criteria Weighting: A Ranking Stability and Sensitivity Analysis
Abstract
Selecting an appropriate new store location is a complex multi-criteria decision-making problem because potential locations must be evaluated using multiple criteria with different performance characteristics. This study proposes an integrated distance-based Multi-Criteria Decision-Making framework using RECA Weighting combined with TOPSIS, SPOTIS, and EDAS to determine objective criterion importance and evaluate the stability and robustness of alternative rankings. The dataset consists of eight potential store locations evaluated using six criteria: Rental Cost, Building Area, Accessibility, Consumer Traffic, Parking Availability, and Infrastructure. RECA Weighting is applied to determine objective criterion weights based on performance variation, while TOPSIS, SPOTIS, and EDAS are used to generate preference scores and rankings through different distance-based evaluation mechanisms. The results show that Consumer Traffic obtains the highest criterion weight of 0.1824, while Parking Availability receives the lowest weight of 0.1422. The ranking results identify LS5 as the best-performing alternative, followed by LS3, although several alternatives exhibit different ranking positions across the applied methods. Weight-variation analysis using Spearman rank correlation shows that SPOTIS achieves perfect ranking stability with a correlation of 1.0000, TOPSIS demonstrates very strong stability with a correlation of 0.9286, while EDAS produces a lower correlation of 0.1429, indicating greater ranking variation. These findings demonstrate that SPOTIS provides the highest robustness to criterion weight changes, followed by TOPSIS, whereas EDAS is more sensitive to weight variations due to its average-solution-based evaluation mechanism. Overall, the proposed framework provides a comprehensive approach for objective weighting, ranking stability assessment, sensitivity analysis, and robustness evaluation in new store location selection.
References
T. Van Dua and D. D. Trung, “MEPSI (Mutriss Enhanced Preference Selection Index): a novel method for ranking alternatives,” EUREKA Phys. Eng., vol. 2024, no. 6, pp. 169–178, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.21303/2461-4262.2024.003408.
J. Wang, S. Setiawansyah, and S. Sumanto, “Comparison of Objective Weighting Methods in SAW and Their Effect on Alternative Ranking Results,” J. Masy. Inform., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 89–112, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.14710/jmasif.17.1.78414.
M. Krstić, G. P. Agnusdei, P. P. Miglietta, S. Tadić, and V. Roso, “Applicability of Industry 4.0 Technologies in the Reverse Logistics: A Circular Economy Approach Based on COmprehensive Distance Based RAnking (COBRA) Method,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 9. 2022. doi: 10.3390/su14095632.
E. Roszkowska and T. Wachowicz, “Impact of Normalization on Entropy-Based Weights in Hellwig’s Method: A Case Study on Evaluating Sustainable Development in the Education Area,” Entropy, vol. 26, no. 5. 2024. doi: 10.3390/e26050365.
A. Yudhistira, S. Setiawansyah, T. Ardiansah, S. Maryana, Y. Yadin, and R. Oktaviani, “Development of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory Methods in Dynamic Decision Models Using Change-Data Driven,” Evergreen, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 3279–3289, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.5109/7326962.
V. R. R. Mota, C. F. S. Gomes, D. F. de Lima Silva, and M. dos Santos, “The novel hybrid multiple criteria decision method BWM-Moora-N applied for investment funds prioritization,” Oper. Res., vol. 24, no. 3, p. 36, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s12351-024-00817-w.
A. Puška, D. Božanić, Z. Mastilo, and D. Pamučar, “Extension of MEREC-CRADIS methods with double normalization-case study selection of electric cars,” Soft Comput., vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 7097–7113, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s00500-023-08054-7.
V. Simić, B. Milovanović, S. Pantelić, D. Pamučar, and E. B. Tirkolaee, “Sustainable route selection of petroleum transportation using a type-2 neutrosophic number based ITARA-EDAS model,” Inf. Sci. (Ny)., vol. 622, pp. 732–754, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2022.11.105.
S. Dündar, “Prioritizing the Regional Preferences of Turkish Investors Regarding Foreign Direct Investment by ARLON Method,” Konya J. Eng. Sci., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 927–946, 2025, doi: 10.36306/konjes.1648279.
A. Asistyasari, M. W. Arshad, I. Chandra, Y. Nuryaman, and V. H. Saputra, “Integration of RECA Weighting and MARCOS Methods in Decision Support Systems for the Selection of the Best Customer Recommendations,” J. Inform. dan Rekayasa Perangkat Lunak, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 122–136, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.33365/jatika.v6i2.219.
D. A. Megawaty, D. Damayanti, S. Sumanto, P. Permata, D. Setiawan, and S. Setiawansyah, “Development of a Decision Support System Based on New Approach Respond to Criteria Weighting Method and Grey Relational Analysis: Case Study of Employee Recruitment Selection,” JOIV Int. J. Informatics Vis., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 314–323, 2025, doi: 10.62527/joiv.9.1.2744.
A. Asistyasari, I. Chandra, S. H. Hadad, Y. Nuryaman, and J. Wang, “Decision Support System Based on RECA and COPRAS Methods in Performance Evaluation of Non-Permanent Employees,” J. Inform. dan Rekayasa Perangkat Lunak, vol. 6, no. 3 SE-Articles, pp. 236–251, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.33365/jatika.v6i3.848.
S. Setiawansyah and I. Chandra, “Objective Approach in Supplier Selection: Integration of RECA Weighting and Combinative Distance-based Assessment Method,” Chain J. Comput. Technol. Comput. Eng. Informatics, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 138–159, Jul. 2026, doi: 10.58602/chain.v4i3.264.
E. Triantaphyllou and A. Sánchez, “A Sensitivity Analysis Approach for Some Deterministic Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods,” Decis. Sci., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 151–194, Jan. 1997, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01306.x.
V. Maliene, R. Dixon-Gough, and N. Malys, “Dispersion of relative importance values contributes to the ranking uncertainty: Sensitivity analysis of Multiple Criteria Decision-Making methods,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 67, pp. 286–298, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2018.03.003.
T. Rashid, A. Ali, and Y.-M. Chu, “Hybrid BW-EDAS MCDM methodology for optimal industrial robot selection.,” PLoS One, vol. 16, no. 2, p. e0246738, 2021, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246738.
À. Gaona, A. Guisasola, and J. A. Baeza, “An integrated TOPSIS framework with Full-Range Weight Sensitivity Analysis for robust decision analysis,” Decis. Anal. J., vol. 17, p. 100642, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.dajour.2025.100642.
G. Demir and R. Arslan, “Sensitivity Analysis in Multi-Criterion Decision-Making Problems,” Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilim. Fakültesi Derg., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 1025–1056, 2022, doi: 10.26745/ahbvuibfd.1103531.
B. Yagmahan and H. Yılmaz, “An integrated ranking approach based on group multi-criteria decision making and sensitivity analysis to evaluate charging stations under sustainability,” Environ. Dev. Sustain., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 96–121, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10668-021-02044-1.
B. Deta and S. M. I. Bedanaen, “Comparison of SAW, AHP, and TOPSIS Methods in a Decision Support System for Teacher Performance Evaluation,” Res. Horiz., vol. 5, no. 5 SE-Articles, pp. 1995–2008, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.54518/rh.5.5.2025.798.
J. Liu, X. Bao, and L. Chen, “Artificial intelligence in educational technology and transformative approaches to English language using fuzzy framework with CRITIC-TOPSIS method,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 25542, 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-09844-9.
P. L. de Oliveira, M. Â. L. Moreira, I. P. de Araújo Costa, D. A. de Moura Pereira, C. F. S. Gomes, and M. dos Santos, “Human Resources Selection Through the PSI-SPOTIS Hybrid Modelling: Multi-criteria Analysis of Sellers for Technological Market BT - Proceedings of International Conference on Information Technology and Applications,” 2025, pp. 445–459. doi: 10.1007/978-981-96-1758-6_37.
A. Shekhovtsov, J. Wiȩckowski, B. Paradowski, B. Kizielewicz, J. Watróbski, and W. Sałabun, “A Novel Approach Utilizing Local Criteria Weights for Multi-criteria Evaluation Within the SPOTIS Method BT - Intelligent Information and Database Systems,” 2024, pp. 276–287.
T. Ali, A. Aytekin, and M. Demidionov, “Optimal siting of wind powered green hydrogen production in Bangladesh using interval-valued T-spherical fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 217, p. 153931, 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2026.153931.
S. Bektaş, “Financial Performance Ranking With A New Hybrid Decision Making Model: Application Of The CRISUS-RAWEC Hybrid Model For The Reinsurance Industry,” Gümüşhane Univ. J. Soc. Sci., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 233–249, 2026, [Online]. Available: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/gumus/article/1721934
M. A. Al-Gerafi et al., “Designing of an effective e-learning website using inter-valued fuzzy hybrid MCDM concept: A pedagogical approach,” Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 97, pp. 61–87, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2024.04.012.
P. Liu, X. Wang, Y. Fu, and P. Wang, “Graph model for conflict resolution based on the combination of probabilistic uncertain linguistic and EDAS method,” Inf. Sci. (Ny)., vol. 660, no. 3, pp. 120–136, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2024.120116.
R. D. Gunawan, M. W. Arshad, A. D. Wahyudi, R. R. Suryono, T. Widodo, and F. Ulum, “Modification of Additive Ratio Assessment Method through Distance-Based Weighting Approach for Optimizing Assessment Accuracy,” Paradig. - J. Komput. dan Inform., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 55–64, 2025, doi: 10.31294/p.v27i2.8810.
Copyright (c) 2026 Sumanto Sumanto, Ryan Randy Suryono, Riska Aryanti, Hetty Rohayani, Setiawansyah Setiawansyah, Desyanti Desyanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
