Effect of choice complexity on design efficiency in conjoint choice experiments

Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference

Volumn 141, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 2276-2286

  Danthurebandara, Vishva Manohara ^a   Yu, Jie ^a   Vandebroek, Martina ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b Katholieke Universiteit Leuven   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Between respondent variability; Choice complexity; Entropy; Heteroscedastic conditional logit model; Optimal experimental design

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952245618     PISSN: 03783758     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jspi.2011.01.008     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Dellaert B.G.C., Brazell J.D., Louviere J.J. The effect of attribute variation on consumer consistency. Marketing Letters 1999, 10:139-147.
2. de Palma A., Myers G.M., Papageorgiou Y.Y. Rational choice under an imperfect ability to choose. American Economic Review 1994, 84:419-440.
3. DeShazo J., Fermo G. Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: the effects of complexity on choice consistency. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2002, 44:123-143.
4. Kessels R., Goos P., Vandebroek M. A comparison of criteria to design efficient choice experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 2006, 43:409-419.
5. Meyer R.K., Nachtsheim C.J. The coordinate-exchange algorithm for constructing exact optimal experimental designs. Technometrics 1995, 37:60-69.
6. Mazzotta M., Opaluch J. Decision making when choices are complex: a test of Heiner's hypothesis. Land Economics 1995, 71(4):500-515.
7. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics 1974, 105-142. Academic Press, New York. P. Zarembka (Ed.).
8. Sándor Z., Franses P.H. Consumer price evaluations through choice experiments. Journal of Applied Econometrics 2009, 24:517-535.
9. Sándor Z., Wedel M. Designing conjoint choice experiments using managers' prior beliefs. Journal of Marketing Research 2001, 38:430-444.
10. Severin V.C. Comparing statistical efficiency and respondent efficiency in choice experiments 2000, The University of Sydney.
11. Swait J., Adamowicz W. Choice environment, market complexity and consumer behavior: a theoretical and empirical approach for incorporating decision complexity into models of consumer choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2001, 86:141-167.
12. Vermeulen B., Goos P., Vandebroek M. Models and optimal designs for conjoint choice experiments including a no-choice option. International Journal of Research in Marketing 2008, 25:94-103.
13. Yu J., Goos P., Vandebroek M. Model robust design of conjoint choice experiments. Journal of Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation 2008, 37:1603-1621.