All Issue

2019 Vol.12, Issue 4 Preview Page

Original Article

31 December 2019. pp. 27-41
Abstract
References
1
Lee, J. H. and Jung, H. C. (2016). A comparative Study on Validity of AHP and Conjoint Analysis : A Case of Cosmetics Preference, The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics. 29(5): 925-927.
10.5351/KJAS.2016.29.5.921
2
Seong, R. H., Yoo, K. Y., Jeon, K. M., Kim, Y. H., Hwang, D. G., and Park, H. S. (2018). '17 Estimation and Evaluation of Road Traffic Accident Costs. KoROAD. p. 92.
3
Jang, T. W. (2009). Methodological Considerations on the Method of Determining the Importance of Choosing the AHP Method and the Conjoint. Journal of Practical Research in Advertising and Public Relations. 2(1): 10-14.
4
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill. New York.
10.21236/ADA214804
5
Satty, T. L. (1990). How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48: 9-26.
10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I

Korean References Translated from the English

1
이지혜, 정형철 (2016). 계층적 의사결정과 컨조인트 분석의 타당성 비교 : 화장품 선호 사례 조사. 응용통계연구. 29(5): 925-927.
10.5351/KJAS.2016.29.5.921
2
성락훈, 유기열, 전광모, 김용환, 황대곤, 박해수 (2018). '17 도로교통 사고비용의 추계와 평가 자료. 도로교통공단. p. 92.
3
장택원 (2009). AHP법과 컨조인트를 활용한 중요도 결정법에 대한 방법적 고찰. 광고PR실학연구. 2(1): 10-14.
Information
  • Publisher :Korean Society of Disaster and Security
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국방재안전학회
  • Journal Title :Journal of Korean Society of Disaster and Security
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국방재안전학회 논문집
  • Volume : 12
  • No :4
  • Pages :27-41
  • Received Date : 2019-11-14
  • Revised Date : 2019-12-12
  • Accepted Date : 2019-12-16