Pioneer phase
Decision support system (DSS) path
A DSS is treated as a design science artefact, evaluated by the standards of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). Applying the SAW or TOPSIS formula is not enough; what has to be shown is the quality of its decisions.
A testable research question
For example: how closely does the system's ranking agree with the experts' decision, and how stable is that ranking when the weights change? A sentence such as "building an application that makes things easier" cannot be tested.
The evidence required
- Consistent weights: with AHP, the consistency ratio is reported.
- Rankings compared across methods, for example SAW and TOPSIS.
- Sensitivity analysis: how the ranking changes when the weights shift.
- Agreement between the system's ranking and the experts' ranking.
- A check for rank reversal when alternatives are added or removed.
What is being built
This path opens in stages. The following parts are not available yet:
- MCDM analysis: AHP weights and consistency ratio, rankings by several methods, sensitivity, Spearman and Kendall rank correlations, and rank reversal.
- An IMRaD report outline and a glossary of terms in Indonesian and English.
- The learning module "DSS research you can defend".
Meanwhile, usability questionnaires such as the SUS can already be analysed in Melola Stat, and literature can be found in Melola Discovery.