Abstract
Nowadays, for market simulation in consumer markets with multi-attributed products, choice-based conjoint analysis (CBC) is most popular. The popularity stems—on one side—from the possibility to use online-panels for affordable data collection and—on the other side—from the possibility to estimate part worths at the respondent level using only few observations. However, a still open question is, whether this money- and time-saving approach provides the same or even better results than ratings-/rankings-based alternatives. An experiment with 787 students from Poland and Germany is used to answer this question: Cola preferences are measured using CBC as well as ratings-/rankings-based alternatives. The results are compared using the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix for the estimated part worths and first choice hit rates for holdout choice sets. The experiment shows a superiority of CBC, but also important differences between Polish and German cola consumers that outweigh methodological differences.
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
References
Ansari, W. E., Stock, C., & Mikolajczyk, T. (2012). Relationships between food consumption and living arrangements among university students in four European countries: A cross-sectional study. Nutrition Journal, 28, 1–7.
Baier, D. (1999). Methoden der Conjointanalyse in der Marktforschungs- und Marketingpraxis. In W. Gaul & M. Schader (Eds.), Mathematische Methoden der Wirtschaftswissenschaften (pp. 197–206). Heidelberg: Physica.
Campbell, D. R., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.
Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures for marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73.
Elrod, T., Louviere, J., & Davey, K. (1992). An empirical comparison of ratings-based and choice-based conjoint models. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), 368–377.
Green, P. E., Krieger, A. M., & Wind, Y. (2001). Thirty years of conjoint analysis: Reflections and prospects. Interfaces, 31(3b), 56–73.
Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5(2), 103–123.
Karniouchina, E. V., Moore, W. L., Van der Rhee, B., & Verma, R. (2009). Issues in the use of ratings-based versus choice-based conjoint analysis in operations management research. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(1), 340–348.
Louviere, J. J., & Woodworth, G. (1983). Design and analysis of simulated consumer choice or allocation experiments: An approach based on aggregate data. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(4), 350–367.
Moore, W. L. (2004). A cross-validity comparison of ratings-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 299–312.
Moore, W. L., Gray-Lee J., & Louviere, J. J. (1998). A cross-validity comparison of conjoint analysis and choice models at different levels of aggregation. Marketing Letters, 9(2), 195–208.
Oliphant, K., Eagle, T. G., Louviere, J. J., & Anderson, D. (1992). Cross-task comparison of ratings-based and choice-based conjoint. In M. Metegrano (Ed.), Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings (pp. 383–404).
Sattler, H., & Hartmann, A. (2008). Commercial use of conjoint analysis. In K. I. Hoeck & M. Voigt (Eds.), Operations management in theorie und praxis (Vol. 1, pp. 103–119). Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Sawtooth Software. (2013). The CBC system for choice-based conjoint analysis version 8. Orem, UT: Sawtooth Software Inc.
Selka, S., & Baier, D. (2014). Kommerzielle Anwendung auswahlbasierter Verfahren der Conjointanalyse: Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Validitätsentwicklung. Marketing ZFP, 36(1), 54–64.
Selka, S., Baier, D., & Kurz, P. (2014). The validity development of conjoint analysis over time: An investigation of commercial studies. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization, 48, 227–234.
Vriens, M., Oppewal, H., & Wedel, M. (1998). Rating-based versus choice-based latent class conjoint models: An empirical comparison. Journal of the Market Research Society, 40(3), 237–248.
Wittink, D. R., & Cattin, P. (1989). Commercial use of conjoint analysis: An update. Journal of Marketing, 53(3), 91–96.
Wittink, D. R., Vriens, M., & Burhenne, W. (1994). Commercial use of conjoint analysis in Europe: Results and critical reflections. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11(1), 41–52.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Baier, D., Pełka, M., Rybicka, A., Schreiber, S. (2015). Ratings-/Rankings-Based Versus Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis for Predicting Choices. In: Lausen, B., Krolak-Schwerdt, S., Böhmer, M. (eds) Data Science, Learning by Latent Structures, and Knowledge Discovery. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44983-7_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44983-7_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-44982-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-44983-7
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)