Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Framework to Overcome Hesitancy of Decision-Makers in E-Government Web Site Evaluation

  • Published:
International Journal of Fuzzy Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Considering the undeniable role of websites in the success of interactions between citizens and governments, evaluating e-government web sites is a worthwhile topic. This research has developed a multi-attribute-decision-making technique rely on Step-Wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis and hesitant fuzzy weighted geometric Heronian mean decision-making methods, for evaluating e-government websites. Proposed framework overcome the limitations of previous investigations such as the possibility of aggregation of expert opinions using group decision-making and modeling the hesitancy of the experts (due to the incompleteness of their knowledge or their doubts in evaluating different aspects of the model) through hesitant fuzzy sets. The designed framework was used in Iran to evaluate e-government websites. In this regard, after a careful and systematic review of previous researches, a list of dimensions and evaluation criteria was presented in the form of a comprehensive model. Then, an expert-based process was proposed to localize the model according to the conditions of the case study. The results of the research show that the final rankings of the decision-making method used in the hesitant environment rarely changed for different operators. So as the experts have confirmed, the model used in this study has acceptable stability.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ma, H.: Toward global competitive advantage Creation, competition, cooperation, and co-option. Manag. Decis. 42(7), 907–924 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  2. European Commission: eGovernment Improving But Citizens Ask for More. European Commission, Brussels (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kumar, V., Rajan, B., Gupta, S., Dalla, Pozza I.: Customer engagement in service. J. Acad. Market. Sci 47(1), 138–160 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Taharim, N.F., Zainal, N.K., Lim, W.X.: An affective design guideline to optimize higher institution websites. Int. Conf. Kansei Eng. Emot. Res. 6(3), 771–780 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rotchanakitumnuai, S.: Measuring e-government service value with the E-GOVSQUAL-RISK model. J. Bus. Process Manag. 14(5), 724–737 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Abd Ellatif, M.M.: A proposed questionnaire to evaluate the quality of E-Government website and test it. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1079164 (2006). Accessed 30 Apr 2019

  7. Golden, W., Hughes, M., Scott, M.: The role of process evolution in achieving citizen centered e-government. In: Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems (2003)

  8. Awan, M.A.: Dubai e-government: an evaluation of G2B websites. J. Internet Commerce 6(3), 115–129 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nawafleh, S.: Factors affecting the continued use of e-government websites by citizens: an exploratory study in the Jordanian public sector. Transform. Gov. People Process Policy 12(3/4), 244–264 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Northrup, T.A., Thorson, S.J.: The Web of governance and democratic accountability. In: Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2003)

  11. Rahman, M.A.: A method to evaluate E-Government service quality attributes. In User Centric E-Government, vol. 28, pp. 65–88. Springer, Cham (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kaylor, C., Deshazo, R., Van Eck, D.: Gauging e-government: a report on implementing services among American cities. J. Gov. Inf. Quart. 18, 293–307 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nielsen, J.: Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity, Indianapolis. New Riders Publishing, USA (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tate, M.A., Alexander, J.E.: Web wisdom: how to evaluate and create information quality on the web, Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Yu, L., Wang, J., Shao, X., Li, J.: The current situation and development trend of China’s tourism e-commerce. Int. J. Tour. Sci. 18(4), 312–324 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chong, S., Law, R.: Review of studies on airline website evaluation. J. Travel Tour. Market. 36(1), 60–75 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Peters, R.M., Janssen, M., Van Engers, T.M.: Measuring e-government impact: existing practices and shortcomings. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on electronic commerce (ICEC’04), ACM (2004)

  18. Fei, J., Yao, R., Yu, L.: Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process application to e-government performance evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery (FSKD ‘08) (2008)

  19. Latif, M.H.A., Masrek, M.N.: Accessibility evaluation on malaysian e-Government websites. J. E-Gov. Stud. Best Pract. 1–11, 2010 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lee, H., Irani, Z., Osman, I., Balic, A., Ozhan, S., Medeni, T.D.: Research note: toward a reference process model for citizen-oriented evaluation of e-government services. Transform. Gov. People Process Policy 2(4), 297–310 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lau, A.S.: Strategies to encourage the adoption of G2C e-government services in Hong Kong. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 1(3), 273–292 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  22. The Singapore government website.: http://www.egov.sg. Accessed 2004

  23. Meghan, E.: Center for technology in government. University at Albany, Suny (2000). http://www.ctg.albany.edu. Accessed 2004

  24. Sayar, C., Wolfe, S.: Internet banking market performance: turkey versus the UK. Int. J. Bank Market. 25(3), 122–141 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dominic, P., Jati, H., Sellappan, P., Nee, G.K.: A comparison of Asian e-government websites quality: using a non-parametric test. Int. J. Bus. Inf. Syst. 7(2), 220–246 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hendradjaya, B., Praptini, R.: A proposal for a quality model for E-Government website. In: International conference on data and software engineering (2015)

  27. Abu-Shanab, E.A., Abu Baker, A.N.: Evaluating Jordan’s e-government website: a case study. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 8(4), 271–289 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Papadomichelaki, X., Mentzas, G.: e-GovQual: a multiple-item scale for assessing e-government service quality. J. Gov. Inf. Quar. 29, 98–109 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Barnes, S.J., Vidgen, R.T.: Data triangulation and web quality metrics: a case study in e-government. J. Inf. Manag. 43, 767–777 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Burmaoglu, S., Kazancoglu, Y.: E-government website evaluation with hybrid MCDM method in fuzzy environment. Int. J. Appl. Decis. Sci. 5, 2 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Markaki, O.I., Charilas, D.E., Askounis, D.: Application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to evaluate the quality of E-Government web sites. Dev. E-Syst. Eng. (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/DeSE.2010.42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Dominic, P., Jati, H., Kannabiran, G.: Performance evaluation on quality of Asian e-government websites—an AHP approach. Int. J. Bus. Inf. Syst. 6(2), 219–239 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Yuan, K., Yuan, J.: Model of integrated assessment of E-government website based on analytic hierarchy process. In: International conference on management of e-Commerce and e-Government (2009)

  34. Kamoun, F., Almourad, M.B.: Accessibility as an integral factor in e-government web site evaluation: the case of Dubai e-government. J. Inf. Technol. People 27(2), 208–228 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sivaji, A., Abdullah, A., Downe, A.G.: Usability testing methodology: effectiveness of heuristic evaluation in E-Government website development. In: Fifth Asia modelling symposium (2011)

  36. Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z.: Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (Swara). J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 11(2), 243–258 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Duan, C.-Y., Liu, H.-C., Zhang, L.-J., Shi, H.: An extended alternative queuing method with linguistic Z-numbers and its application for green supplier selection and order allocation. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 21, 1–14 (2019)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Zolfani, S.H., Yazdani, M., Zavadskas, E.K.: An extended stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA) method for improving criteria prioritization process. Soft. Comput. 22(22), 7399–7405 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dahooie, J.H., Zavadskas, E.K., Firoozfar, H.R., Vanaki, A.S., Mohammadi, N., Brauers, W.: An improved fuzzy MULTIMOORA approach for multi-criteria decision making based on objective weighting method (CCSD) and its application to technological forecasting method selection. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 79, 114–128 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kahraman, C., Onar, S.C., Oztaysi, B.: Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 8(4), 637–666 (2015)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Chen, S.-J., Hwang, C.-L.: Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods. Springer, Berlin (1992)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Liu, P., Wang, P.: Some q-rung orthopair fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multiple-attribute decision making. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 33(2), 259–280 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Liu, P., Chen, S.-M., Wang, P.: Multiple-attribute group decision-making based on Q-Rung orthopair fuzzy power Maclaurin symmetric mean operators. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2018.2852948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Xu, Z., Xia, M.: Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf. Sci. 181(11), 2128–2138 (2011)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Alcantuda, J.C.R., Torra, V.: Decomposition theorems and extension principles for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf. Fus. 41, 48–56 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Torra, V.: Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25(6), 529–539 (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Liao, H.T.M., Zhang, X., Al-Barakati, A.: Detecting and visualizing in the field of hesitant fuzzy sets: a bibliometric analysis from 2009 to 2018. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 21(5), 1289–1305 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Liao, H., Xu, Z., Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F.: Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application in decision making: a state-of-the-art survey. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 20(7), 2084–2110 (2018)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  49. Yu, D.: Hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methods based on Heronian mean. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 23(2), 296–315 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Zeng, W., Li, D., Yin, Q.: Weighted interval-valued hesitant fuzzy sets and its application in group decision making. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 21(2), 421–432 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Byun, D.-H., Finnie, G.: Evaluating usability, user satisfaction and intention to revisit for successful e-government websites. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 8(1), 1–19 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Zhu, B., Xu, Z.S.: Hesitant fuzzy Bonferroni means for multi-criteria decision making. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 64(12), 1831–1840 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Zhu, B., Zeshui, X., Meimei, X.: Hesitant fuzzy geometric Bonferroni means. Inf. Sci. 205, 72–85 (2012)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Yu, D.: Intuitionistic fuzzy geometric Heronian mean aggregation operators. Appl. Soft Comput. 13(2), 1235–1246 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Jalal Al-e-Ahmad Ave., Nasr Bridge, Tehran, 14155-6311, Iran

    Jalil Heidary Dahooie, Amir Salar Vanaki & Sajedeh Daneshmoghadam

  2. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas

Authors
  1. Jalil Heidary Dahooie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amir Salar Vanaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sajedeh Daneshmoghadam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jalil Heidary Dahooie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heidary Dahooie, J., Vanaki, A.S., Daneshmoghadam, S. et al. A Framework to Overcome Hesitancy of Decision-Makers in E-Government Web Site Evaluation. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 22, 583–603 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-019-00790-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-019-00790-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation