Summary
Despite the recent methodological progress to unburden respondents in preference analysis the quality of consumers’ judgements is fundamental for marketing research results. Surprisingly, the impact of ambiguous and erroneous judgments given by the respondents is widely neglected in the marketing literature. In this paper we compare the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Conjoint Analysis with respect to the impact of random errors as well as ambiguities in preference statements by means of Monte Carlo simulation studies. Referring to Thurstone’s law of comparative judgements, we demonstrate the superior robustness of the Analytic Hierarchy Process in dealing with these kinds of perturbing effects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Fischhoff, B. (1991). Value elicitation: Is there anything in there? American Psychologist, 46, 837–847.
Fujii, S. and Gärling, T. (2003). Application of attitude theory for improved predictive accuracy of stated preference methods in travel demand analysis. Transport Research A, 37(4), 289–402.
Kuhfeld, W. F. (2004). Marketing Research Methods in SAS: Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques. SAS, Carry.
Pommerehne, W. W., Schneider, F., and Zweifel, P. (1982). Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon: A reexamination. The American Economic Review, 72(3), 569–574.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill.
Schmidt, F. L. and Hunter, J. E. (1999). Theory testing and measurement error. Intelligence, 27(3), 138–198.
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.
Thurstone, L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273–286.
Torgerson, W. (1958). Theory and methods of scaling. Wiley, New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Scholz, S.W., Meißner, M., Wagner, R. (2006). Robust Preference Measurement A Simulation Study of Erroneous and Ambiguous Judgement’s Impact on AHP and Conjoint Analysis. In: Haasis, HD., Kopfer, H., Schönberger, J. (eds) Operations Research Proceedings 2005. Operations Research Proceedings, vol 2005. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg . https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32539-5_96
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32539-5_96
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-32537-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32539-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)