Applying a fuzzy questionnaire in a peer review process

References

• Alfonso, G., López, R., de Hierro, A. F., & Roldán, C. (2016). A fuzzy regression model based on finite fuzzy numbers and its application to real-world financial data. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 24(2), 344–359.
   Google Scholar
• Amini, S., & Jochem, R. (2011). A conceptual model based on the fuzzy set theory to measure and evaluate the performance of service processes. Paper presented at enterprise distributed object computing conference workshops (EDOCW), 29 Aug–2 Sept 2011, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 122–131.
   Google Scholar
• Andayani, S., Hartati, S., Wardoyo, R., & Mardapi, D. (2017). Decision-making model for student assessment by unifying numerical and linguistic data. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 7(1), 363–373.
   Google Scholar
• Başaran, M. A., Kalaycı, N., & Atay, M. T. (2011). A novel hybrid method for better evaluation: Evaluating university instructors teaching performance by combining conventional content analysis with fuzzy rule based systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 12565–12568. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battisti, F., Nicolini, G., & Salini, S. (2005). The Rasch model to measure service quality. The ICFAI Journal of Services Marketing, 3(3), 58–80.
   Google Scholar
• Battisti, F., Nicolini, G., & Salini, S. (2010). The Rasch model in customer satisfaction survey data. Quality Technology & Quantitative Management, 7(1), 15–34. doi: 10.1080/16843703.2010.11673216
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berk, R. A. (2005). Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 48–62.
   Google Scholar
• Blackmore, J. A. (2005). A critical evaluation of peer review via teaching observation within higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(3), 218–232.
   Google Scholar
• Brent, R., & Felder, R. M. (2004). A protocol for peer review of teaching. Education designs, North Carolina State University, Session 3530.
   Google Scholar
• Brochado, A. (2009). Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 17(2), 174–190. doi: 10.1108/09684880910951381
   Google Scholar
• Büyüközkan, G., Ruan, D., & Feyzioğlu, O. (2007). Evaluating e-learning web site quality in a fuzzy environment. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(5), 567–586. doi: 10.1002/int.20214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabrerizo, F. J., López-Gijón, J., Martínez, M. A., Morente-Molinera, J. A., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2017). A fuzzy linguistic extended LibQUAL+ model to assess service quality in academic libraries. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 16(1), 225–244. doi: 10.1142/S0219622015500406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calcagnì, A., & Lombardi, L. (2014). Dynamic fuzzy rating tracker (DYFRAT): A novel methodology for modeling real-time dynamic cognitive processes in rating scales. Applied Soft Computing, 24, 948–961. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2014.08.049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrasco, R. A., Villar, P., Hornos, M. J., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2011). A linguistic multi-criteria decision making model applied to the integration of education questionnaires. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 4(5), 946–959. doi: 10.1080/18756891.2011.9727844
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, T. C., & Wang, H. (2016). A multi criteria group decision-making model for teacher evaluation in higher education based on cloud model and decision tree. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(5), 1243–1262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, T. C. (2001). Applying linguistic decision-making method to deal with service evaluation problems. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge Based Systems, 9(1), 103–114. doi: 10.1142/S0218488501001022
   Google Scholar
• Courneya, C. A., Pratt, D. D., & Collins, J. (2008). Through what perspective do we judge the teaching of peers? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 69–79. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, W. J. (2008). Fuzzy importance-performance analysis for determining critical service attributes. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 19(2), 252–270. doi: 10.1108/09564230810869766
   Google Scholar
• de Sáa, S. D. L. R., Gil, MÁ, González-Rodríguez, G., López, M. T., & Lubiano, M. A. (2015). Fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaires and their statistical analysis. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 23(1), 111–126. doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2014.2307895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Witte, K., & Rogge, N. (2011). Accounting for exogenous influences in performance evaluations of teachers. Economics of Education Review, 30(4), 641–653. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombi, J. (2008). Towards a general class of operators for fuzzy systems. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 16(2), 477–484. doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2007.905910
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombi, J. (2009). Pliant arithmetics and pliant arithmetic operations. Acta Polytech Hun, 6(5), 19–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, L., Burke, D. M., Lomire, P., & McCormack, D. R. (2003). Student grades and average ratings of instructional quality: The need for adjustment. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 35–40. doi: 10.1080/00220670309596626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frühwirth-Schnatter, S. (1992). On statistical inference for fuzzy data with applications to descriptive statistics. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 50, 143–165. doi: 10.1016/0165-0114(92)90213-N
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gil, M. Á., & González-Rodríguez, G. (2012). Fuzzy vs. Likert scale in statistics. In E. Trillas, P. P. Bonissone, L. Magdalena, & J. Kacprzyk (Eds.), Combining experimentation and theory (pp. 407–420). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gil, M. Á., Lubiano, M. A., De Sáa, S. D. L. R., & Sinova, B. (2015). Analyzing data from a fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaire. A case study. Psicothema, 27(2), 182–191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammed, I. A. (2011). Using Gaussian membership functions for improving the reliability and robustness of students’ evaluation systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 7135–7142. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, J. (2014). Some thoughts on Likert-type scales. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(1), 83–86. doi: 10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70040-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrera, F., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2000). Choice functions and mechanisms for linguistic preference relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 120(1), 144–161. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00383-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrera, F., López, E., Mendana, C., & Rodríguez, M. A. (1999). Solving an assignment–selection problem with verbal information and using genetic algorithms. European Journal of Operational Research, 119(2), 326–337. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00134-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesketh, B., Pryor, R., Gleitzman, M., & Hesketh, T. (1988). Practical applications and psychometric evaluation of a computerized fuzzy graphic rating scale. Advances in Psychology, 56, 425–454. doi: 10.1016/S0166-4115(08)60493-8
   Google Scholar
• Ihsan, A. K. A. M., Taib, K. A., Talib, M. Z. M., Abdullah, S., Husain, H., Wahab, D. A., … Abdul, N. A. (2012). Measurement of course evaluation for lecturers at the faculty of engineering and built environment. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 358–364. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.391
   Google Scholar
• Jónás, T., & Árva, G. (2016). Application of fuzzy inference systems build from data for quality and service management purposes. In S. M. Dahlgaard-Park & J. J. Dahlgaard (Eds.), 19th QMOD-ICQSS conference international conference on quality and service sciences. Roma, Italy, 21.09.2016–23.09.2016. Lund University Library Press, Lund, pp. 519–534.
   Google Scholar
• Kacprzyk, J. (1986). Towards a ‘human-consistent’ multistage decision making and control models using fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 18(3), 299–314. doi: 10.1016/0165-0114(86)90008-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuzmanovic, M., Savic, G., Popovic, M., & Martic, M. (2013). A new approach to evaluation of university teaching considering heterogeneity of students’ preferences. Higher Education, 66(2), 153–171. doi: 10.1007/s10734-012-9596-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lalla, M., Facchinetti, G., & Mastroleo, G. (2005). Ordinal scales and fuzzy set systems to measure agreement: An application to the evaluation of teaching activity. Quality & Quantity, 38(5), 577–601. doi: 10.1007/s11135-005-8103-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Q. (2013). A novel Likert scale based on fuzzy sets theory. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(5), 1609–1618. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.09.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liaw, S. H., & Goh, K. L. (2003). Evidence and control of biases in student evaluations of teaching. International Journal of Educational Management, 17(1), 37–43.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, H. F. (2010a). An application of fuzzy AHP for evaluating course website quality. Computers & Education, 54(4), 877–888. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, H. T. (2010b). Fuzzy application in service quality analysis: An empirical study. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(1), 517–526. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.05.030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liou, T. S., & Chen, C. W. (2006). Subjective appraisal of service quality using fuzzy linguistic assessment. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 23(8), 928–943. doi: 10.1108/02656710610688149
   Google Scholar
• Liu, R., Cui, L., Zeng, G., Wu, H., Wang, C., Yan, S., & Yan, B. (2015). Applying the fuzzy SERVQUAL method to measure the service quality in certification and inspection industry. Applied Soft Computing, 26, 508–512. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2014.10.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology, 4(2), 73–79. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73
   Google Scholar
• Lubiano, M. A., de Sáa, S. D. L. R., Montenegro, M., Sinova, B., & Gil, M. Á. (2016). Descriptive analysis of responses to items in questionnaires. Why not using a fuzzy rating scale? Information Sciences, 360, 131–148. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2016.04.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupo, T. (2013). A fuzzy ServQual based method for reliable measurements of education quality in Italian higher education area. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(17), 7096–7110. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2013.06.045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupo, T. (2016). A fuzzy framework to evaluate service quality in the healthcare industry: An empirical case of public hospital service evaluation in Sicily. Applied Soft Computing, 40, 468–478. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2015.12.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mashhadiabdol, M., Sajadi, S. M., & Talebi, K. (2014). Analysis of the gap between customers’ perceptions and employees’ expectations of service quality based on fuzzy SERVQUAL logic (case study: Mofid children’s hospital in Tehran, Iran). International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 17(2), 119–141. doi: 10.1504/IJSOM.2014.058840
   Google Scholar
• Murray, J. (2013). Likert data: What to use, parametric or non-parametric. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(11), 258–264.
   Google Scholar
• Nadiri, H., Kandampully, J., & Hussain, K. (2009). Students’ perceptions of service quality in higher education. Total Quality Management, 20(5), 523–535. doi: 10.1080/14783360902863713
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quirós, P., Alonso, J. M., & Pancho, D. P. (2016). Descriptive and comparative analysis of human perceptions expressed through fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaires. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 9(3), 450–467. doi: 10.1080/18756891.2016.1175811
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouyendegh, B. D., & Erkan, T. E. (2013). An application of the fuzzy ELECTRE method for academic staff selection. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 23(2), 107–115. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samson, S., & McCrea, D. E. (2008). Using peer review to foster good teaching. Reference Services Review, 36(1), 61–70. doi: 10.1108/00907320810852032
   Google Scholar
• Sowa, J. F. (2013). What is the source of fuzziness? In R. Seiging, E. Trillas, C. Moraga, & S. Termini (Eds.), On fuzziness (pp. 645–652). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Teeroovengadum, V., Kamalanabhan, T. J., & Seebaluck, A. K. (2016). Measuring service quality in higher education: Development of a hierarchical model (HESQUAL). Quality Assurance in Education, 24(2), 244–258. doi: 10.1108/QAE-06-2014-0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tóth Zs, E., Andor, G., & Árva, G. (2017a). Peer review of teaching at Budapest University of technology and economics - faculty of economic and social sciences. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 9(3/4), 402–424. doi: 10.1108/IJQSS-02-2017-0014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tóth Zs, E., Surman, V., & Árva, G. (2017b). Challenges in course evaluations at Budapest University of Technology and Economics. In Z. Bekirogullari, M. Y. Minas, & R. X. Thambusamy (Eds.), 8th ICEEPSY - International conference on education and educational psychology. Porto, Portugal, 2017.10.11–2017.10.14. Future Academy, 2017, pp. 629–641.
   Google Scholar
• Washer, P. (2006). Designing a system for observation of teaching. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(3), 243–250. doi: 10.1108/09684880610678559
   Google Scholar
• Yu, C. M., Tsang, H. T., & Chen, K. S. (2016). Developing a performance evaluation matrix to enhance the learner satisfaction of an e-learning system. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1–19. Published online 19 Sept 2016. http://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1233809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., Lin, T., & Ren, L. (2010). Dynamic fuzzy evaluation for e-commerce service quality based on the SERVPERF. Paper presented at the International Conference on E-Business and E-Government 2010 (ICEE), pp. 576–579. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5590689/
   Google Scholar