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.