References
- Beck, J., Hwang, S. & Lee, S. (2003), Evaluating the effect of the size of brand consideration set upon the Guten-bergs monopolistic price interval. Journal of theKorean Society of Clothing and Textile. 27(8), 1004-10l3
- Campbell, B. M. (1969). The existence of evoked sets and determinants of its magnitude in brand choice behav-ior, unpublished dissertation. Joint Committee on Grad-uate Instruction, Columbia University, New York, NY
- Davis, L. L. (1987). Consumer use of label information in ratings of clothing quality and clothing fashionability. Clothing and Textile Research Journal, 6(1), 8-14
- Dardis, B., Spivak, S. & Shih, C. M. (1985). Price and quality differences for imported and domestic men's dress shirts. Home Economics Research Journal, I3, 391-399
- Eckman, M., Damhorst, M. L. & Kapolph, S. J. (1990). Toward a model of the in-store purchase decision pro-cess: Consumer use of criteria for evaluating womens apparel. Clothing and Textile Research Journal. 8(2), 13-22
- Engel, J. F, Blackwell, R. D. & Miniard, P. W. (1995). Con-sumer Behavior (8th ed.). New York: Dryden Press
- Geurts, M. D. & Whitlark, D. (1993). Forecasting market share. Journal of Business Forecasting. 11(4), 17-22
- Green, P. E. & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New development with implications for research and practice. Journal of Marketing, 54, 3-19
- Green, P. E., Krieger, A. M. & Agarwal, M. K. (1991). Adaptive Conjoint Analysis: Some caveats and sugges-tions. Journal of Marketing Research. 28. 215-222
- Han, S. & Vanhonacker, W. R. (1995). Reference depen-dence and loss aversion in choice set formation and brand selection. Working paper. Hong Kong University of Technology
- Hauser, J. R. & Wernerfelt (1990). An evaluation cost model of consideration sets. Journal of Marketing Research. 16(March), pp. 393-408
- Howard, J. & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons
- Kalyanaram, G. & Little, J. D. C. L. (1994), An empirical analysis of latitude of price acceptance consumer pack-age goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(Decem-ber), pp. 408-418
- Kucher, E. & Hilleke, K. (1993). Value pricing through conjoint analysis: A practical approach. European Management Journal, 11(3), 283-290
- Kwak, Y., Hong, J. & Beck, J. (2001). The difference in the latitude of price acceptance depending on the size of consideration set. Korean Journal of Marketing, 3(3), 25-45
- Kwak, Y. & Lee, J. (2002). Market segmentation with price-dependent quality evaluation in denim jeans mar-ket: Based on conjoint analysis and mixture model. Journal of the Korean Sociery of Clothing and Textile, 26(11), 1605-1614
- Kwak, Y., Nam, Y., Kim, Y. & Lee, J. (2002). The optimal timing of markdown: A decision model for jeans mar-ket. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Tex-tile. 26(5), 606-617
- Louvier, J. & Woodworth, G. (1983). Design and analysis of simulated consumer choice on allocation experi-ments: An approach based on aggregate data. Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 350-367
- Oh, J. & Huh, K. (1995). A Study on the Development of Jeans via Conjoint Analysis. Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textile, 19(3), 448-462
- Park, C. S. (1994). Conjoint analysis. In Yoo, P. H. (Ed.). Modern Marketing Science. (pp. 121-185). Seoul: Bummunsa
- Reibstein, D., Bateson, J. E. G. & Boulding, W. (1987). Conjoint analysis reliability: Empirical findings (Report No. 87-101). Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute
- Siddarth, S., Bucklin, R. E. & Morrison, D.G. (1995). Making the cut; Modeling and analyzing choice set restriction in scanner data. Journal of MarketingResearch, 32, 225-266
- Simon, H. (1989). Price Management. New York; North-Holland
- Shocker, A. D., Ben-Akiva, M., Boccara, B. & Nedungadi, P. (1991). Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice issues, models, sugges-tions. Marketing Letters, 2(3), 181-197
- Urban, G. L. & Hauser, J. R. (1993). Design and Marketing of New Product (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-tice-Hail
- Weiner, J. (1994). Forecasting demand: Consumer electron-ics marketer uses a conjoint approach to configure its new product and set the right price. MarketingResearch: A Magazine of Management & Applications, 6(3), 6-11
- Wittink, D. R. & Cattin, P. (1989). Commercial use of con-joint analysis: An update. Journal of Marketing, 53, 91-96
- Wittink, D. R., Vriens, M. & Burhenne, W. (1994). Com-mercial use of conjoint analysis in Europe: Results and critical reflections. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11,41-52
- Wright, P. (1975). Consumer choice strategy: Simplifying vs. Optimizing. Journal of Marketing Research, I2(Febru-ary), pp. 60-67
- Yoo, P. H. (1991). Pricing Policy. Seoul: Pakyoungsa