PDF Version of this document Search Help Glossary

Lesson Navigation IconSuitability analyis

Unit Navigation IconDecision support with GIS

Unit Navigation IconBoolean Overlay

Unit Navigation IconWeighted overlay

Unit Navigation IconDetermining weights

LO Navigation IconWeighting by ranking

LO Navigation IconWeighting by rating

LO Navigation IconWeighting by pairwise comparison

LO Navigation IconClosing assessment

LO Navigation IconSelf Assessment

Unit Navigation IconSummary

Unit Navigation IconRecommended Reading

Unit Navigation IconGlossary

Unit Navigation IconBibliography

Unit Navigation IconMetadata

GITTA/CartouCHe news:

Go to previous page Go to next page

Weighting by rating

Another common method is rating. Here, the ranked criteria receive a score according to their relative importance.

  • Point allocation: the overall score is to be distributed within the chosen criteria. For example, with a total score of 100, criteria could receive the weights 35, 30, 20, 10, and 5 points with decreasing importance.
  • Ratio estimation: each criterion is provided with an arbitrary score from a defined range of values. The most important criterion receives the highest score (e.g. 100) and the insignificant criteria receive a score of 0.

Advantages and disadvantages

This method is easy and therefore quite popular. It is particularly suitable for problems with a few simple criteria whose relative importance can be estimated with common sense or expertise. However, the distribution of the scores is again subjective and often only poorly justified.


This time, a score should be assigned to the five known criteria according to their relative importance. Please note that the sum of the scores needs to correspond to the total score. Again, the weights are normalized for better comparability. Try your own score distributions and compare the resulting weights.

Weighting by rating
Top Go to previous page Go to next page