The Cost of Simplifying Preference Models
Michael R. Hagerty
Additional contact information
Michael R. Hagerty: GTE Laboratories
Marketing Science, 1986, vol. 5, issue 4, 298-319
Abstract:
Formulas are derived which estimate the accuracy of conjoint analysis in predicting preferences in a validation sample. This accuracy turns out to depend on (among other things) which is used (e.g., whether interactions are added, whether partworth or linear functions are used). I first show a paradoxical result that simpler models often yield higher predictive accuracy, . The reason for this is that the additional parameters of the complex model are estimated with larger variance, which tends to overwhelm the benefits of using the true model. I then shift my criterion from predicting an preferences, to predicting , which is of most interest to managers. Under this criterion my conclusions reverse, and I show that a true model (even when complex) is much more likely to yield higher predictive accuracy than a simpler incorrect model. This reverses some previous conclusions in marketing, and confirms that finding the model of consumer preference is important in improving prediction. Results from four previous empirical papers are correctly predicted by these formulas, as well as results from additional Monte Carlo studies.
Keywords: preference model; conjoint analysis; market share prediction (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1986
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)
Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.5.4.298 (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:5:y:1986:i:4:p:298-319
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Marketing Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().