New
added since previous update (February 2002)
Ackerberg,
D.A. & Rysman, M. (2002). Unobserved product differentiation
in discrete choice models: Estimating price elasticities and welfare effects.
Working paper, Department of Economics, University of California.
Alvarez-Farizo, B. & Hanley, N. (2002). Using
conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts
of wind farms. Energy Policy, 30 (2), 107-116.
Andrews, R.L., Ansari, A. &
Currim, I.S. (2002). Hierarchical Bayes versus finite mixture conjoint analysis
models: A comparison of fit, prediction, and partworth recovery. Journal of
Marketing Research, 39 (1), 87-98.
Blayac, T. & Causse, A. (2001). Value
of travel time: A theoretical legitimization of some nonlinear representative
utility in discrete choice models. Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological, 35 (4), 391-400.
Borooah, V.K. (2001). How do
employees of ethnic origin fare on the occupational ladder in Britain? Scottish
Journal of Political Economy, 48 (1), 1-26.
Boyle, K.J., Holmes, T.P., Teisl,
M.F. & Roe, B. (2001). A comparison of conjoint analysis response formats. American
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83 (2), 441-454.
Cairns,
J. & van der Pol, M. (2001). Discrete choice with
repeated follow-up: A web-based experiment. Skriftserie
i helseøkonomi (No. 30), Program for helseøkonomi i Bergen.
Carter, R. & Dubelaar, C.
& Wiley, J.B. (2000). Applying choice based conjoint measurement to
forecast demand for a new restaurant category. Journal of Food Products
Marketing, 6 (3), 63-78.
Chakraborty, G., Ball, D., Gaeth,
G.J. & Sunkyu, J. (2002). The ability of ratings and choice conjoint to
predict market shares. A Monte Carlo simulation. Journal of Business
Research, 55 (3), 237-249.
Cohen, S.L., Dove, D.W. &
Bachelder, E.L. (2001). Time to Treat Learners as Consumers. Training &
Development, 55 (1), 54-57.
Deal, K. (2001). Individual level
discrete-choice conjoint using CBC/HB. Marketing Research, 13 (1), 31-33.
Easton, F.F. & Pullman, M.E.
(2001). Optimizing service attributes: The seller's utility problem. Decision
Sciences, 32 (2), 251-275.
Fama, E.F. & French, K.R.
(2002). Testing trade-off and pecking order predictions about dividends and
dept. Review of Financial Studies, 15 (1), 1-33.
Fischer,
J. (2001). Individualisierte Präferenzanalyse. Entwicklung und empirische
Prüfung einer vollkommen individualisierten Conjoint-Analyse. Wiesbaden:
Gabler.
Gibson,
L. (2002). Conjoint analysis still misses the mark. Marketing
Research, 14 (1), 49-50.
Gibson, L. (2002). What’s right
with conjoint analysis. Marketing Research, 14 (1), 24-27.
Gibson, L. (2001). What’s wrong
with conjoint analysis. Marketing Research, 13 (4), 16-19.
Green, P.E., Krieger, A.M. &
Wind, Y. (2001). Thirty years of conjoint analysis: Reflections and prospects. Interfaces,
31 (3, part 2), S56-S73.
Haaijer,
R., Kamakura, W. & Wedel, M. (2001). The
„no-choice“ alternative in conjoint choice experiments. International
Journal of Market Research, 43 (1), 93-106.
Heemann,
L. (2001). Die nutzenorientierte Gestaltung von Kundenkarten mittels
Conjoint-Analyse. In L. Müller-Hagedorn (Hrsg.), Kundenbindung im Handel.
Frankfurt a.M.: Deutscher Fachverlag.
Janssen,
V. (2000). Werbeerfolgskontrolle auf dem Prüfstand. Transfer Werbeforschung
& Praxis, 45 (3), 33-35.
Klein,
M. (2002). Wählen als Akt expressiver Präferenzoffenbarung: Eine Anwendung
der Conjoint-Analyse auf die Wahl zur Hamburger Bürgerschaft vom 21. September
1997. Frankfurt a. M.:Lang.
Klein,
M. (2002). Die Wahrnehmung und Bewertung von Wahlplattformen durch die Wähler: Conjoint-Measurement
zur Analyse von Policy-Präferenzen. Planung
& Analyse, 20 (1), 52-57.
Levin, E.J. & Wright, R.E.
(2001). Unemployment insurance, moral hazard, and economic growth. International
Advances in Economic Research, 7 (4), 373-484.
Mallou, J.V., Boubeta, A.R. &
Tobio, T.B. (2001). Consumer preferences and brand equity measurement of
Spanish national daily newspapers: A conjoint analysis approach. Spanish
Journal of Psychology, 4 (1), 48-54.
Melles, T. & Möhle, K. (2002).
Mehrwertkonzepte und Marktforschung: Der Nutzen von Conjoint-Analysen. SMarkt, 2/02, 19-22.
Melles, T. & Schweitzer, A. (2002). Akzeptanz von alternativen Modellen der Schadenregulierung.
Kernergebnisse einer Untersuchung im Auftrag der avanturo GmbH. IVW Management Information,
St. Gallener Trendmonitor für Risiko- und Finanzmärkte, 5/02, 3-7.
Missler-Behr,
M. (2000). Constructing fuzzy utility values in conjoint
analysis. Beiträge
zur OR 2000 in Dresden, Gesellschaft für Operations Research.
Morrison, M., Bennett, J., Blamey,
R. & Louviere, J. (2002). Choice modeling and tests of benefit transfer. American
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84 (1), 161-170.
Moskowitz,
H., Cohen, D., Krieger, B. & Rabino, S. (2001). Interest
and reaction time analysis of credit card offers: Managerial implications of
high level research procedures. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 6
(2), 172-189.
Moyo, P.S. (2002). Discrete
choice analysis of the feed technology decisions of smallholder dairy farmers
in Zimbabwe. Microfiche, National Library of Canada,
Ottawa.
Müller,
J.C. (2001). Empirische Überprüfung der gebrückten Conjoint-Analyse anhand
von Präferenzen für Supermärkte. Diplomarbeit, Universität Eichstätt,
Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät Ingolstadt.
Natter,
M. & Feuerstein, M. (2002). Real world performance of
choice-based conjoint models. European Journal of Operational Research, 137
(2), 448-458.
Otter,
T. (2001). Conjointanalyse zur Messung und Erklärung von Markenwert.
Wien: Service-Fachverlag.
Raghavarao, D. & Wiley, J.B.
(1987). Testing competing effects among soft drink brands. In C.E. McCulloch,
S.J. Schwayer, G. Casella & S.R. Searle (eds.), Statistical design
theory and practice (pp. 161-176). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Raghavarao, D. & Wiley, J.B.
(1994). Experimental designs for availability effects and cross effects with
one attribute. Communications in Statistics, 23 (6), 1835-1846.
Raghavarao, D. & Wiley, J.B.
(1998). Estimating main effects with pareto optimal subsets. Australian
Journal of Statistics, 40 (4), 425-432.
Ronning, G. (2001). Estimation
of discrete choice models with minimal variation of alternative-specific variables.
Tübingen:
Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät der Eberhard-Karls-Universität.
Sadler, T.R. (2001). Environmental
Taxation in an Optimal Tax Framework. Atlantic Economic Journal, 29 (2),
215-231.
Sattler,
H., Hensel-Börner, S. & Krüger, B. (2001). Die Abhängigkeit der Validität
von Conjoint-Studien von demographischen Probandencharakteristika: Neue
empirische Befunde. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 71 (7), 771-787.
Schleusener,
M. (2001). Ermittlung von Preisbereitschaften im
Verkehrsdienstleistungsbereich – dargestellt am Beispiel der Deutschen Bahn AG.
Arbeitspapier (Nr. 149), Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft für Marketing und
Unternehmensführung.
Shi, L., Olafsson, S. & Chen,
Q. (2001). An optimization framework for product design. Management Science,
47 (12), 1681-1692.
Steiner, W.J. & Hruschka, H.
(2001). A probabilistic one-step approach to the optimal product line design
problem using conjoint and cost data. Regensburger Diskussionsbeiträge zur
Wirtschaftswissenschaft (Nr. 360), Universität Regensburg.
Tarasewich, P. & Nair, S.K.
(2001). Designer-moderated product design. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 48 (2), 175-188.
Teichert,
T. (2001). Nutzenschätzung in Conjoint-Analysen. Theoretische Fundierung und
empirische Aussagekraft. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag.
Thaden,
C. von (2002). Conjoint-Analyse mit vielen Merkmalen:
Monte-Carlo-Untersuchung einer gebrückten Conjoint-Analyse. Frankfurt a.M.:
Lang.
Townend, M. & Shackley, P.
(2002). Establishing and quantifying the preferences of mental health service
users for day hospital care: Pilot study using conjoint analysis. Journal of
Mental Health, 11 (1), 85-96.
Tsalikis, J., Seaton, B. &
Shepherd, P.L. (2001). Relativism in ethical resarch: A proposed model and mode
of inquiry. Journal of Business Ethics, 32 (3), 231-246.
Tsalikis, J., Seaton, B. &
Tomaras, P (2002). A new perspective on cross-cultural ethical evaluations: The
use of conjoint analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 35 (4), 281-292.
van der Haar, J.W., Kemp, R.G.M
& Omta, O. (2001). Creating value that cannot be copied. Industrial
Marketing Management, 30 (8), 627-636.
van
der Pol, M. & Cairns, J. (2001). Estimating time preferences
for health using discrete choice experiments. Social Science & Medicine,
52 (9), 1459-1470.
Wangen,
K.R. & Biørn, E. (2001). Prevalence and substitution
effects in tobacco consumption: A discrete choice analysis of panel data.
Discussion papers (No. 312), Statistics Norway, Research Department.
Whiting, R. (2001). Virtual focus
group. Informationweek, 848, 53-58.
Wiley, J.B. (1978). Selecting
pareto optimal subsets from multi-attribute alternatives. In K. Hunt (ed.), Advances
in Consumer Research (No. 5, pp. 171-174). Chicago, IL: Association for
Consumer Research.
Wiley, J.B. (2001). Experimental
designs in choice experiments. In Recent advances in design of experiments
and related areas. Nova Science Publishers.
Wiley, J.B., Moinpour, R. &
MacLachlan, D. (1984). A strategy for reducing and analysing ordered choice
data. Journal of Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1984, 421-436.