AHP versus ACA - An empirical comparison

Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 447-454

  Meißner, Martin ^a   Scholz, Sören W ^a   Decker, Reinhold ^a  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; DATA HANDLING; DECISION MAKING; INFORMATION ANALYSIS; MACHINE LEARNING; MARKETING;

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP); CONSUMER PREFERENCES; EMPIRICAL - COMPARISONS; EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION; MANAGERIAL DECISION MAKING; MARKETING RESEARCH; PREFERENCE STRUCTURES; SIMULATION STUDIES;

HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS;

EID: 84879595382     PISSN: 14318814     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-78246-9_53     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. FRICKER, S., GALESIC, M., TOURANGEAU, R. and YAN, T. (2005): An Experimental Comparison of Web and Telephone Surveys, Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 3, 370-392.
2. FUR (2004): Travel Analysis 2004 by Study Group "Vacation and Travelling", www.fur.de.
3. GREEN, P.E. and SRINIVASAN, V. (1990): Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice, Journal of Marketing, 54, 3-19.
4. HAMILTON, J.M. and LAU, M.A. (2004): The Role of Climate Information in Tourist Destination Choice Decision-making,Working Paper FNU-56, Centre for Marine and Climate Research, Hamburg University.
5. HAUSER, J.R. and TOUBIA, O. (2005): The Impact of Utility Balance and Endogenity in Conjoint Analysis, Marketing Science, 24, 3, 498-507.
6. HERRMANN, A., SCHMIDT-GALLAS, D. and HUBER, F. (2005): Adaptive Conjont Analysis: Understanding the Methodology and Assessing Reliability and Validity. In: A. Gustafsson, A. Herrmann and F. Huber (Eds.): Conjoint Measurement: Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin, 253-278.
7. PÖYHÖNEN, M., VROLIJK, H. and HÄMÄLÄINEN, R.P. (2001): Behavioral and Procedural Consequences of Structural Variation in Value Trees, European Journal of Operational Research, 134, 1, 216-227.
8. SAATY, T.L. (1980): The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw Hill, New York.
9. SAWTOOTH SOFTWARE (2003): SSI Web v3.5, Sawtooth Software.
10. SAWTOOTH SOFTWARE (2005): Report on Conjoint Analysis Usage among Sawtooth Software Customers, www.sawtoothsoftware.com, accessed March 2007.
11. SCHOLL, A., MANTHEY, L., HELM, R. and STEINER, M. (2005): Solving Multiattribute Design Problems with Analytic Hierarchy Process and Conjoint Analysis: An Empirical Comparison. European Journal of Operational Research, 164, 760-777.
12. SCHOLZ, S.W. and DECKER, R. (2007): Measuring the Impact of Wood Species on Consumer Preferences for Wooden Furniture by Means of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Forest Products Journal, 57, 3, 23-28.
13. SCHOLZ, S.W., MEISSNER, M. andWAGNER, R. (2006): Robust Preference Measurement: A Simulation Study of Erroneous and Ambiguous Judgement's Impact on AHP and Conjoint Analysis. In: H.-O. Haasis, H. Kopfer and J. Schönberger (Eds.): OR Proceedings 2005, Springer, Berlin, 613-618.