Enhancing discrete choice demand modeling for decision-based design

Journal of Mechanical Design

Volumn 127, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 514-523

  Wassenaar, Henk Jan ^a   Chen, Wei ^b   Cheng, Jie ^a   Sudjianto, Agus ^c  

^a JD Power and Associates   (United States)

^b Northwestern University   (United States)

^c Bank of America Corp   (United States)

Author keywords

Customer utility; Decision based design; Demand modeling; Discrete choice analysis; Engine design; Hierarchy of attributes; Kano method; Vehicle design

Indexed keywords

AUTOMOBILE ENGINES; CUSTOMER SATISFACTION; DECISION MAKING; MARKETING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBABILITY; VEHICLES;

CUSTOMER UTILITY; DECISION BASED DESIGN; DEMAND MODELING; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; ENGINE DESIGN; HIERARCHY OF ATTRIBUTES; KANO METHOD; VEHICLE DESIGN;

PRODUCT DESIGN;

EID: 23044445286     PISSN: 10500472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1115/1.1897408     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Hazelrigg, G. A., 1998, "A Framework for Decision Based Engineering Design," J. Mech. Des., 120, pp. 653-658.
2. Wassenaar, H. J., and Chen, W., 2003, "An Approach to Decision Based Design With Discrete Choice Analysis for Demand Modeling," ASME J. Mech. Des., 125(3), pp. 490-497.
3. Gu, X., Renaud, J. E., Ashe, L. M., Batill, S. M., Budhiraja, A. S., and Krajewski, L. J., 2002, "Decision-Based Collaborative Optimization," ASME J. Mech. Des., 124(1), pp. 1-13.
4. Tappeta, R. V., and Renaud, J. E., 2001, "Interactive Multiobjective Optimization Design Strategy for Decision Based Design," ASME J. Mech. Des., 123(2), pp. 205-215.
5. Wan, J., and Krishnamurty, S., 2001, "Learning-Based Preference Modeling in Engineering Design Decision-Making," ASME J. Mech. Des., 123(2), pp. 191-198.
6. Thurston, D. L., 2001, "Real and Misconceived Limitations to Decision Based Design With Utility Analysis," ASME J. Mech. Des., 123(2), pp. 176-186.
7. Thurstone, L., 1927, "A Law of Comparative Judgment," Psychol. Rev., 34, pp. 273-286.
8. Luce, R., 1959, Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis, Wiley, New York.
9. Marschak, J., 1960, "Binary Choice Constraints on Random Utility Indicators," Stanford Symposium on Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences, K. Arrow, ed., Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
10. Tversky, A., 1972, "Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice," Psychol. Rev., 79, pp. 281-299.
11. Green, P. E., and Srinivasan, V., 1990, "Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice," J. Marketing, 54, pp. 3-19.
12. Green, P. E., and Srinivasan, V., 1978, "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," J. Consum. Res., 5, pp. 103-123.
13. Green, P. E., and Wind, Y., 1975, "New Ways to Measure Consumer Judgments," Harvard Bus. Rev., 53, pp. 107-117.
14. Louviere, J. J., 2000, "Why Stated Preference Discrete Choice Modelling is NOT Conjoint Analysis (and what SPDCM IS)," Memetrics white paper.
15. Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S. R., 1985, Discrete Choice Analysis, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
16. Cook, H. E., 1997, Product Management: Value, Quality, Cost, Price, Profit, and Organization, Chapman & Hall, London.
17. Donndelinger, J., and Cook, H. E., 1997, "Methods for Analyzing the Value of Automobiles," SAE Paper No. 970762, Warrendale, PA, Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
18. Li, H., and Azarm, S., 2000, "Product Design Selection Under Uncertainty and With Competitive Advantage," ASME Design Technical Conference, ASME Paper No. DETC2000/DAC-14234, Baltimore, MD.
19. Besharati, B., Azarm, S., and Farhang-Mehr, A., 2002, "A Customer-Based Expected Utility for Product Design Selection," Proc. of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Montreal, Canada, ASME, New York, DETC2002/DAC-34081.
20. Wassenaar, H. J., "An Approach to Decision-Based Design," Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois at Chicago, October 2003.
21. Hensher, D. A., and Johnson, L. W., 1981, Applied Discrete Choice Modeling, Halsted Press, New York.
22. Daganzo, C., 1979, Multinomial Probit, the theory and Its Application to Demand Forecasting, Academic Press, New York.
23. Shiba, S., Graham, A., and Walden, D., 1993, New American TQM: Four Practical Revolutions in Management, Productivity Press, Cambridge, Mass.
24. Saari, D. G., 2000, "Mathematical Structure of Voting Paradoxes, I; Pairwise Vote, II; Positional Voting," J. Econ. Theory, 15, pp. 1-103.
25. Otto, K. N., and Wood, K., 2001, Product Design: Techniques in Reverse Engineering and New Product Development, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
26. Krueger, R. A., 1994, Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 2nd Edition, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
27. Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A., and Swait, J. D., 2000, Stated Choice Methods, Analysis and Application, Cambridge University Press; Hair, J. F., (editor), Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C., 1998, Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th Edition, Prentice Hall College Div.
28. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., and Friedman, J., 2001, The Elements of Statistical Learning, Springer, New York.
29. Raftery, A., 1995, "Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research," Sociol. Methodol. 25, pp. 111-163.
30. Loehlin, J. C., 1998, Latent Variable Models, An Introduction to Factor, Path, and Structural Analysis, 3rd Edition, L. Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
31. Breiman, L., Spector, P., 1992, "Submodel Selection and Evaluation in Regression: The X-Random Case," Int. Statist. Rev., 60, pp. 291-319.