Abstract
Conflicting findings have been found in previous research that compared choice-based conjoint analysis and ranking conjoint analysis in a public good setting. The present paper revisits this issue for a private good in a non-hypothetical context using small and large choice sets. Our results suggest that in a small choice set setting, participants' preferences and willingness to pay are similar across the two conjoint analysis formats. However, in large choice sets, a divergence between the two conjoint analysis formats emerges. Hence, the two conjoint analysis formats can only be used interchangeably in small choice sets, not in large choice sets.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 949-963 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | American Journal of Agricultural Economics |
| Volume | 95 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 Jul 1 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- conjoint analysis
- non-hypothetical settings
- small and large choice sets
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
- Economics and Econometrics
Cite this
Akaichi, F., Nayga, R. M., & Gil, J. M. (2013). Are results from non-hypothetical choice-based conjoint analyses and non-hypothetical recoded-ranking conjoint analyses similar? American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 95(4), 949-963. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aat013