A Comparison of Conjoint Analysis Response Formats

Abstract

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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 162 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.