A Comparison of Conjoint Analysis Response Formats

Kevin Boyle, Thomas P. Holmes, Mario Teisl () and Brian Roe

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2001, vol. 83, issue 2, 441-454

Abstract: A split-sample design is used to evaluate the convergent validity of three response formats used in conjoint analysis experiments. We investigate whether recoding rating data to rankings and choose-one formats, and recoding ranking data to choose one, result in structural models and welfare estimates that are statistically indistinguishable from estimates based on ranking or choose-one questions. Our results indicate that convergent validity of ratings, ranks, and choose one is not established. In addition, we find that people frequently use ‘ties’ in responses to rating questions, and that the option not to choose any of the alternatives (‘opt-out’) affects some preference estimates. Copyright 2001, Oxford University Press.

Date: 2001
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (48)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/0002-9092.00168 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:oup:ajagec:v:83:y:2001:i:2:p:441-454

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Agricultural Economics is currently edited by Madhu Khanna, Brian E. Roe, James Vercammen and JunJie Wu

More articles in American Journal of Agricultural Economics from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().