Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5351/KJAS.2014.27.5.681

An Empirical Comparison of Predictability of Ranking-based and Choice-based Conjoint Analysis  

Kim, Bu-Yong (Department of Statistics, Sookmyung Women's University)
Publication Information
The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics / v.27, no.5, 2014 , pp. 681-691 More about this Journal
Abstract
Ranking-based conjoint analysis(RBCA) and choice-based conjoint analysis(CBCA) have attracted significant interest in various fields such as marketing research. When conducting research, the researcher has to select one suitable approach in consideration of strengths and weaknesses. This article performs an empirical comparison of the predictability of RBCA and CBCA in order to provide criterion for the selection. A new concept of measurement set is developed by combining the ranking set and choice set. The measurement set enables us to apply two approaches separately on the same consumer group that allows a fair comparison of predictability. RBCA and CBCA are conducted on consumer preferences for RTD-coffee; subsequently, the predicted values of market shares and hit rates are compared. The study result reveals that their predictabilities are not significantly different. Further, the result indicates that RBCA is recommended if the researcher wants to improve data quality by filtering out poor responses or to implement the market segmentation. In contrast, CBCA is recommended if the researcher wants to lessen the burden on the respondents or to measure preferences under similar conditions with the actual marketplace.
Keywords
Predictability; ranking-based conjoint; choice-based conjoint; measurement set; RTD-coffee;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 11  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Eggers, F. and Eggers, F. (2011). Where have all the flowers gone? Forecasting green trends in the automobile industry with a choice-based conjoint adoption model, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78, 51-62.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Elrod, T., Louviere, J. J. and Davey, K. S. (1992). An empirical comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint models, Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 368-377.   DOI
3 Endrizzi, I., Menichelli, E., Johansen, S. B., Olsen, N. V. and Naes, T. (2011). Handling of individual differences in rating-based conjoint analysis, Food Quality and Preference, 22, 241-254.   DOI
4 Gensler, S., Hinz, O., Skiera, B. and Theysohn, S. (2012). Willingness-to-pay estimation with choice-based conjoint analysis: Addressing extreme response behavior with individually adapted designs, European Journal of Operation Research, 219, 368-378.   DOI
5 Hong, J. S., Jeon, J. Y. and Kim, Y. S. (2012). Study on consumers' restaurant selection criteria by using conjoint analysis, Journal of East Asian Society of Dietary Life, 22, 315-321.   과학기술학회마을
6 Jervis, S. M., Lopetcharat, K. and Drake, M. A. (2012). Application of ethnography and conjoint analysis to determine key consumer attributes for latte-style coffee beverages, Journal of Sensory Studies, 27, 48-58.   DOI
7 Jin, B., Park, J. Y. and Ryu, J. S. (2010). Comparison of Chinese and Indian consumers' evaluative criteria when selecting denim jeans: A conjoint analysis, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 14, 180-194.   DOI
8 Jo, M. N. (2010). Conjoint analysis of restaurant attributes on customer intentions to choose restaurant, The Korean Journal of Culinary Research, 16, 254-268.   과학기술학회마을
9 Jung, U. (2012). Conjoint analysis on the academia-industrial cooperative research project attributes for culture technology research, Management Science and Financial Engineering, 29, 13-21.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
10 Karniouchina, E. V., Moore, W. L., Rhee, B. and Verma, R. (2009). Issues in the use of ratings-based versus choice-based concomitant analysis in operations management research, European Journal of Operations Research, 197, 340-348.   DOI
11 Kaufman, S., Kunzel, K. and Loock, M. (2013). Customer value of smart metering: Explosive evidence from a choice-based conjoint study in Switzerland, Energy Policy, 53, 229-239.   DOI
12 Kim, B. Y. (2012). New design of choice sets for choice-based conjoint analysis, The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 25, 847-857.   과학기술학회마을   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Kim, B. Y. (2014). New method for preference measurement in ranking-based conjoint analysis, The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 27, 185-195.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
14 Kim, Y. J. and Kim, B. S. (2012). An analysis on consumers' preference of agricultural products cultivated from plants factory system, Journal of the Korean Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 13, 5052-5059.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
15 Kim, B. Y., Kim, J. and Kahn, Y. (2012). Analysis of consumer preferences for cosmetic essence-for-men via choice-based conjoint with new design of choice sets, Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 25, 987-997.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
16 Kim, J. H., Kim, J. H. and Kim, M. K. (2010). Development of dental services markets segmentation and strategy by use of conjoint analysis, Korean Journal of Health Policy and Administration, 20, 1-20.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
17 Lee, E. Y., Park, Y. W. and Lee, S. B. (2010). An exploratory study on selection attributes of food in the cultural tourism festival through conjoint analysis, The Korean Journal of Culinary Research, 16, 94-113.   과학기술학회마을
18 Kuhfeld, W. F. and Tobias, R. D. (2005). Large factorial designs for product engineering and marketing research applications, Technometrics, 47, 132-141.   DOI
19 Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., Neter, J. and Li, W. (2005). Applied Linear Statistical Models, McGraw Hill.
20 Lebeau, K., Mierlo, J. V., Lebeau, P., Mairesse, O. and Macharis, C. (2012). The market potential for plugin hybrid and battery electric vehicles in Flanders: A choice-based conjoint analysis, Transportation Research Part D, 17, 592-597.   DOI
21 Lim, B., Ahn, K. and Park, U. (2006). A study on the comparison of the predictability among traditional and choice-based conjoint analysis in the choice of service products, Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 39-54.
22 Mesias, F. J., Martinez-Carrasco, F., Martinez, J. M. and Gaspar, P. (2010). Functional and organic eggs as an alternative to conventional production: A conjoint analysis of consumers' preferences, Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 91, 532-538.
23 Moore, W. L. (2004). A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, 299-312.   DOI
24 Nikou, S., Bouwman, H. and Reuver, M. (2012). The potential of converged mobile telecommunication services: A conjoint analysis, The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media, 14, 21-35.
25 Sayadi, S., Roa, M. C. G. and Requena, J. C. (2005). Ranking versus scale rating in conjoint analysis: Evaluating landscapes in mountainous regions in southeastern Spain, Ecological Economics, 55, 539-550.   DOI
26 Ong, F. S., Kitchen, P. F. and Chew, S. S. (2010). Marketing a consumer durable brand in Malaysia: A conjoint analysis and market simulation, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27, 507-515.   DOI
27 Park, R. J. and Lee, D. H. (2011). Information security risk: Application of the conjoint analysis, Journal of Korean Data and Information Science Society, 22, 207-215.   과학기술학회마을
28 Ryu, H. S. and Roh, E. K. (2010). Preference and subjective evaluation of washed fabric hand using conjoint analysis, Textile Research Journal, 80, 2167-2175.   DOI
29 Voelkel, J. G. (2005). The efficiencies of fractional factorial designs, Technometrics, 47, 488-494.   DOI
30 Adanacioglu, H. and Albayram, Z. (2012). A conjoint analysis of consumer preference for traditional cheeses in Turkey: A case study on Tulum cheese, Korean Journal for Food Science of Animal Resources, 32, 458-466.   DOI
31 Annunziata, A. and Vecchio, R. (2013). Consumer perception of functional food: A conjoint analysis with probiotics, Food Quality and Preference, 28, 348-355.   DOI
32 Bridges, J. F. P., Lataille, A. T., Buttorff, C. B., White, S. and Niparko, J. K. (2012). Consumer preferences for hearing aid attributes: A comparison of rating and conjoint analysis methods, Trends in Amplification, 16, 40-48.   DOI
33 Ariji, M. (2010). Conjoint analysis of consumer preference for blue-fin tuna, Fisheries Science, 76, 1023-1028.   DOI
34 Berkson, J. (1955). Maximum likelihood and minimum Chi-square estimates of the logistic function, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50, 130-162.
35 Boyle, K. J., Holmes, T. P., Teisl, M. F. and Roe, B. (2001). A comparison of conjoint analysis response formats, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83, 441-454.   DOI
36 Chakraborty, G., Ball, D., Gaeth, G. J. and Jun, S. (2002). The ability of rating and choice conjoint to predict market shares: A Monte Carlo simulation, Journal of Business Research, 55, 237-249.   DOI
37 Chen, Y. H., Hsu, I. C. and Lin, C. C. (2010). Website attributes that increase consumer purchase intention: A conjoint analysis, Journal of Business Research, 63, 1007-1014.   DOI
38 Choi, W. S., Seo, K. H. and Lee, S. B. (2012). A study on the development of HMR products of Korean foods using conjoint analysis, The Korean Journal of Culinary Research, 18, 156-167.   과학기술학회마을
39 Chung, H. S., Hong, H. D., Kim, K., Cho, C. W., Moskowitz, H. R. and Lee, S. Y. (2011). Consumer attitudes and expectations of ginseng food products assessed by focus groups and conjoint analysis, Journal of Sensory Studies, 26, 346-357.   DOI
40 Deliza, R., Rosenthal, A., Hedderley, D. and Jaeger, S. (2010). Consumer perception of irradiated fruit: A case study using choice-based conjoint analysis, Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 184-200.   DOI