경영과학 (Korean Management Science Review)

한국경영과학회 (The Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society)
권호 표지

EBA 모형을 활용한 유사 컨조인트 분석

Conjoint-like Analysis Using Elimination-by-Aspects Model

  • 발행 : 2008.03.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Conjoint Analysis is marketers' favorite methodology for finding out how buyers make trade-offs among competing products and suppliers. Thousands of applications of conjoint analysis have been carried out over the past three decades. The conjoint analysis has been so popular as a management decision tool due to the availability of a choice simulator. A conjoint simulator enables managers to perform 'what if' question accompanying the output of a conjoint study. Traditionally the First Choice Model (FCM) has been widely used as a choice simulator. The FCM is simple to do, easy to understand. In the FCM, the probability of an alternative is zero until its value is greater than others in the set. Once its value exceeds that threshold, however, it receives 100%. The LOGIT simulation model, which is also called as "Share of Preference", has been used commonly as an alternative of the FCM. In the model part worth utilities aren't required to be positive. Besides, it doesn't require part worth utilities computed under LOGIT model. The simulator can be used based on regression, monotone regression, linear programming, and so on. However, it is not free from the Independent from Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA) problem. This paper proposes the EBA (Elimination-By-Aspects) model as a useful conjoint-like method. One advantage of the EBA model is that it models choice in terms of the actual psychological processes that might be taking place. According to EBA, when choosing from choice objects, a person chooses one of the aspects that are effective for the objects and eliminates all objects which do not have this aspect. This process continues until only one alternative remains.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Green, P.E., A.M. Krieger and Y. Wind, "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis：Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, Vol.31, No.3(2001), pp.S56-S73 https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.31.3s.56.9676
  2. Green, P.E. and V. Srinivasan, "Conjoint Analysis in Marketing：New Developments With Implications for Research and Practice," Journal of Marketing, Vol.54(1990), pp.3-19 https://doi.org/10.2307/1251756
  3. Hauser, J.R., "Agendas and Consumer Choice," Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.23(1986), pp.199-212 https://doi.org/10.2307/3151479
  4. Huber, J., "Dealing with Product Similarity in Conjoint Simulations," Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series, Sawtooth Software, (1999), pp.1-14
  5. Moore, W.L., "Factorial Preference Structure," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.17(1990), pp.94-104 https://doi.org/10.1086/208540
  6. Rotondo, J., "Price as an Aspect of Choice in EBA," Marketing Science, Vol.5(1986), pp.391-402 https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.5.4.391
  7. Tversky, A., "Choice by Elimination," Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol.9(1972a), pp.341-367 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(72)90011-9
  8. Tversky, A., "Elimination by Aspects：A Theory of Choice," Psychological Review, Vol.79, No.4(1972b), pp.281-299 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032955
  9. Tversky, A. and S. Sattath, "Preference Trees," Psychological Review, Vol.86, No.6(1979), pp.542-573 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.86.6.542