Are results from non-hypothetical choice-based conjoint analyses and non-hypothetical recoded-ranking conjoint analyses similar?

Faical Akaichi; Rodolfo M. Nayga; José M. Gil

doi:10.1093/ajae/aat013

Are results from non-hypothetical choice-based conjoint analyses and non-hypothetical recoded-ranking conjoint analyses similar?

Faical Akaichi, Rodolfo M. Nayga, José M. Gil

Department of Food and Resource Economics

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

21 Citations (Scopus)

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	https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aat013
Publication status	Published - 2013 Jul

Keywords

conjoint analysis
non-hypothetical settings
small and large choice sets

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
Economics and Econometrics

Access to Document

10.1093/ajae/aat013

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Are results from non-hypothetical choice-based conjoint analyses and non-hypothetical recoded-ranking conjoint analyses similar?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{ac85ca60fcea4c658b43913589afeb91,

title = "Are results from non-hypothetical choice-based conjoint analyses and non-hypothetical recoded-ranking conjoint analyses similar?",

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.",

keywords = "conjoint analysis, non-hypothetical settings, small and large choice sets",

author = "Faical Akaichi and Nayga, {Rodolfo M.} and Gil, {Jos{\'e} M.}",

note = "Funding Information: We thank the Center for Agro-Food Econ omy and Development (CREDA) as well as the Scottish Government{\textquoteright}s Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services (RESAS) program for their financial support to carry out the experiments.",

year = "2013",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1093/ajae/aat013",

language = "English",

volume = "95",

pages = "949--963",

journal = "American Journal of Agricultural Economics",

issn = "0002-9092",