Improving the validity of conjoint analysis by additional data collection and analysis steps

Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 529-536

  Selka, Sebastian ^a   Baier, Daniel ^a   Brusch, Michael ^a  

^a BRANDENBURG UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EYE MOVEMENTS; MAMMALS; STATISTICAL METHODS;

ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES; CONCRETE APPLICATIONS; CONJOINT ANALYSIS; CONJOINT EXPERIMENTS; ONLINE INTERVIEWS; POTENTIAL SOURCES; STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY; TEMPORAL STABILITY;

DATA ACQUISITION;

EID: 84890016894     PISSN: 14318814     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-24466-7_54     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. AllenbyGM, Arora N, Ginter JL (1995) Incorporating prior knowledge into the analysis of conjoint analysis. J Market Res 32(2):152-162
2. Baier D (1998) Conjointanalytische Lösungsansätze zur Parametrisierung des House of Quality: Methodik und Anwendungsbeispiel. In: VDI-Gesellschaft Systementwicklung und Projektgestaltung (ed) QFD-Produkte und Dienstleistungen marktgerecht gestalten, pp 73-88
3. Brusch M, Baier D (2008) Conjoint analysis for complex services using clusterwise hierarchical Bayes procedures. Stud Classification 31:431-438
4. Chen YC, Shang RA, Kao CY (2009) The effects of information overload on consumers' subjective state towards buying decision in the internet shopping environment. Electron Commerce Res Appl 8(1):48-58
5. DeSarbo W, Fong D, Liechty J, Coupland J (2005) Evolutionary preference/utility functions: A dynamic perspective. Psychometrika 70(1):179-202
6. DingM, Grewal R, Liechty J (2005) Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis. JMarket Res 42(1):67-82
7. Green PE, Srinivasan V (1978) Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. J Consum Res Interdiscipl Q 5(2):103-123
8. Green PE, Krieger AM,Wind Y (2001) Thirty years of conjoint analysis: reflections and prospects. Interfaces 31(3):56-73
9. Hensel-Börner S, Sattler H (2006) Ein empirischer Validitätsvergleich zwischen der Customized Computerized Conjoint Analysis (ccc), der Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (aca) und Self-Explicated-Verfahren. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft 70:705-727
10. Jacoby J (1984) Perspectives on information overload. J Consum Res 4:432-435
11. Jacoby J, Speller DE, Kohn CA (1974) Brand choice behavior as a function of information load. J Market Res 11(1):63-69
12. Johnson RM (1987) Adaptive conjoint analysis. In: Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conferece on Perceptual Mapping, Conjoint Analysis, and Computer Interviewing, Sawtooth Software, Sun Valley, pp 253-265
13. Johnson RM, Orme BK (1996) How many questions should you ask in choice-based conjoint studies? Tech. rep., Sawtooth Software, Sequim
14. Louviere JJ (1984) Hierarchical information integration: a new method for the design and analyis of complex multiattribute judgement problems. Adv Consum Res 11(1):148-155
15. Louviere JJ,Woodworth G (1983) Design and analysis of simulated consumer choice or allocation experiments: An approach based on aggregate data. J Market Res 20(4):350-367
16. McCullough J, Best R (1979) Conjoint measurement: Temporal stability and structural reliability. J Market Res 16(1):26-31
17. Netzer O, Toubia O, Bradlow E, Dahan E, Evgeniou T, Feinberg F, Feit E, Hui S, Johnson J, Liechty J, Orlin J, Rao V (2008) Beyond conjoint analysis: Advances in preference measurement. Market Lett 19(3):337-354
18. Pauwels K (2004) How dynamic consumer response, competitor response, company support, and company inertia shape long-term marketing effectiveness. Market Sci 23(4):596-610
19. Sethuraman R, Kerin RA, Cron WL (2005) A field study comparing online and offline data collection methods for identifying product attribute preferences using conjoint analysis. J Bus Res 58(5):602-610
20. Srinivasan V (1988) A conjunctive-compensatory approach to the self-explication of multiattributed preference. Decis Sci 19(2):295-395
21. Srinivasan V, Park CS (1997) Surprising robustness of the self-explicated approach to customer preference structure measurement. J Market Res 34(2):286-291
22. Voeth M (2000) Nutzenmessung in der Kaufverhaltensforschung: Die Hierarchische Individualisierte Limit Conjoint-Analyse (HILCA). Gabler, Wiesbaden, Germany
23. Voeth M, Hahn C (1998) Limit conjoint-analyse. Market ZFP 2(2):119-132
24. Wildner R, Dietrich H, Hölscher A (2007) HILCA: A new conjoint procedure for an improved portrayal of purchase decisions on complex products. Yearbook Market Consum Res 5:5-20