ArticleBMC psychology2024
Towards a better psychological satisfaction: developing a mixed multi-criteria evaluation system to urban 'Not in my back yard' facilities siting.
Article in BMC psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
'Not in My Back Yard (NIMBY)' facilities are psychologically sensitive to urban and regional development. Multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) method has been widely used for the decision-making of optimum siting of urban NIMBY facilities which aim to improve residents' psychological satisfaction. However, the evaluation of qualitative criteria in siting analysis remains under researched, such as the insufficient focus on urban and regional spatial development, social public opinion, and psychological factors. Thus, the effective improvement of MCE method through an interdisciplinary view can optimise the decision process and advance the factor assessment system of siting, which helps to supplement qualitative criteria evaluation. The specific improvement steps are as follows. The first step is to introduce the mixed MCE method to improve the qualitative criteria evaluation method by pre-processing qualitative criteria with min-max standardisation and normalization. This process transfers all negative factors to positive ones and transforms the F function to linear functions. The second step is to optimise the existing two-phase siting decision-making including the feasibility evaluation phase and the MCE phase. The third step is to propose a modular criteria system composed of urban and regional spatial planning, social psychological factors and the corresponding improvement strategy of this system from three perspectives of composition, measure, and weight. We argue that the improved method could be broadly applied to optimum siting decision of urban NIMBY facilities and enhance the psychological satisfaction of residents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.