What do library users want? A conjoint measurement technique may yield the answer

https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(82)90002-4Get rights and content

Abstract

Libraries are continuing to face more costly means of acquiring information while consumer needs and behavioral patterns become more complex. In order to cope, we can expect some drastic changes in library procedures. In all likelihood the library will have to move from its traditional role of a supplier of “free goods” to one where users will be expected to pay directly for some services. With this prospect, it has become necessary to understand client attitudes that even the most intelligent users cannot readily articulate.

Various measurement methods are available to assess user judgments. Attempts have been made to use a modified form of the standard gamble with little success. However, a feasible method for data collection is a group of techniques called conjoint measurement. One procedure, trade-off analysis, is discussed and examples given for its use in determining a users relative utility for completeness of information vs cost of a search. The conjoint measurement techniques hold great potential as a measurement procedure for quantifying consumers' value judgments.

References (12)

  • R.D. Luce et al.

    Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement

    J. Math. Psych.

    (1964)
  • P.E. Green

    On the design of choice experiments involving multifactor alternatives

    J. Consumer Res.

    (1974)
  • P.E. Green et al.

    Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental data

    J. Marketing Res.

    (1971)
  • P.E. Green et al.

    New way to measure consumers' judgments

    Harvard Business Review

    (1975)
  • P.E. Green et al.

    A general approach to product design optimization via conjoint analysis

    J. Marketing

    (1981)
  • P.E. Green et al.

    Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook

    J. Consumer Res.

    (1978)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.
View full text