W
Wachter, B. & Haupt, K. (1995). Kundenzufriedenheit erhöhen. Die qualitative Symbiose der Marktforschung und der Conjoint Analyse. Planung und Analyse, 22 (2), 51-52 und 69.
Wagner, J. (1990). Conjoint
analysis and research on consumer preferences. In Book of Papers, American
Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, 1990 International Conference
& Exhibition (pp. 387-412). Research Triangle Park, NC: American
Association of Textil.
Walker, M. (1993). Cost-effective
product development. Long Range Planning, 26, 64-66.
Walley, K., Parsons, S. &
Bland, M. (1999). Quality assurance and the consumer: A conjoint study. British
Food Journal, 101 (2), 148-161.
Wallsten,
T.S. (1972). Conjoint-measurement framework for the study of
probabilistic information processing. Psychological Review, 79 (3),
245-260.
Wallsten,
T.S. (1976). Using conjoint-measurement models to investigate a
theory about probabilistic information processing. Journal of Mathematical
Psychology, 14 (2), 144-185.
Wallsten, T.S. (1977). Measurement and interpretation of beliefs: A review. In H. Jungermann & G. de Zeeuw (Eds.), Decision making and change in human affairs (pp. 369-393). Dordrecht.
Walsh,
J. & Schmittlein, D. (1997). Using choice-based conjoint
analysis for individual level predictions: An empirical investigation of choice
set, choice task, and model estimation factors. Paper
presented at the 1997 INFORMS Marketing Science Conference, Berkeley, CA.
Wang, D., Oppewal, H. & Timmermans,
H. (2000). Pairwise conjoint analysis of activity engagement choice. Environment
and Planning A, 32 (5), 805-816.
Wang,
M.H. (1999). Factors influencing preferences for persons with
disabilities: A conjoint analysis and cross-cultural comparison. Dissertation
Abstracts International (Section B: The Sciences and Engineering), Vol 60(1-B),
0414.
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.
Wardman, M. (1988). A comparison
of revealed preference and stated preference models. Journal of Transport
Economics and Policy, 22, 71-91.
Weber,
M., Eisenführ, F. & Winterfeldt, D.V. (1988). The
effects of splitting attributes on weights in multiattribute utility
measurement. Management Science, 34 (4), 431-445.
Wedel,
M. & DeSarbo, W.S. (1994). A review of recent developments in
latent class regression models. In R.P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Advanced methods of
marketing research (pp. 352-388). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Wedel,
M. & Kamakura, W. (1997). Market segmentation: Conceptual
and methodological foundations. Boston: Kluwer.
Wedel,
M. & Kistemaker, C. (1989). Consumer benefit segmentation
using clusterwise linear regression. International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 6, 45-59.
Wedel, M. & Steenkamp,
J.-B.E.M. (1989). A fuzzy clusterwise regression approach to benefit
segmentation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 6,
241-258.
Wedel, M. & Steenkamp,
J.-B.E.M. (1991). A clusterwise regression method for simultaneous fuzzy market
structuring and benefit segmentation. Journal of Marketing Research, 28,
385-396.
Wedel,
M., Vriens, M., Bijmolt, T., Krijnen, W. & Leeflang, P.S.H. (1998). Assessing
the effects of abstract attributes and brand familiarity in conjoint choice
experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15, 71-78.
Wedel, M., Vriens, M., Bijmolt,
T.H.A. & Krijnen, W. (1995). CONFOLD: Simultaneous product optimization and
brand positioning using conjoint choice methods. In EMAC Proceedings, Paris,
May 1995 (pp. 2109-2115).
Weiber,
R. & Rosendahl, T. (1996). Einsatzmöglichkeiten alternativer
Untersuchungsansätze der Conjoint-Analyse. In A. von Ahsen & T. Czenskowsky
(Hrsg.), Marketing und Marktforschung: Entwicklungen, Erweiterungen und
Schnittstellen im nationalen und internationalen Kontext (S. 557-584).
Hamburg: Lit.
Weiber,
R. & Rosendahl, T. (1997). Anwendungsprobleme der Conjoint-Analyse. Marketing
ZFP, 19, 107-118.
Weinberg,
B.D. (1990). Role for research and models in improving new
product development. Report of the Marketing Science Institute Conference
(No. 90-120). Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Weiner, J. (1994). Consumer
electronics marketer uses a conjoint approach to configure ist new product and
set the right price. Marketing Research, 6 (3), 7-11.
Weiner,
J.L. (1993). Alternative conjoint analysis techniques: Implications
for marketing research (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at
Arlington). Dissertation Abstracts International, 54-08A, 3122.
Weiner,
J.L. (1999). Using scanner data to validate choice model estimates.
In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference (No. 7, pp. 201-206).
Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Weisenfeld, U. (1987). Signifikanztest für die Anpassungsgüte in Conjoint-Analysen. Marketing ZFP, 4, 267-270.
Weisenfeld, U. (1989). Die Einflüsse von Verfahrensvariationen und der Art des Kaufentscheidungsprozesses auf die Reliabilität der Ergebnisse bei der Conjoint Analyse. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Weiss, P.A. (1992). Die Kompetenz von Systemanbietern: Ein neuer Ansatz im Marketing für Systemtechnologien. Berlin: Schmidt.
Weitz, B. & Wright, P. (1979).
Retrospective self-insight on factors considered in product evaluation. Journal
of Consumer research, 6, 280-294.
Westwood, D., Lunn, T. &
Beazley, D. (1974). The trade-off model and its extensions. Journal of the
Market Research Society, 16 (3), 227-241.
Wetzels, M., de Ruyter, K.,
Lemmink, J. & Koelemeijer, K. (1995). Measuring customer service quality in
international marketing channels: A multimethod approach. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, 10 (5), 50-59.
Wheatley, K.L. & Flexner, W.A.
(1987). Research tool changes the way marketers view data. Marketing News,
21 (5), 23-24.
Whiting, R. (2001). Virtual focus
group. Informationweek, 848, 53-58.
Wie,
S., Ruys, H. & Muller, T.E. (1999). A gap
analysis of perceptions of hotel attributes by marketing managers and older
people in Australia. Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing
Science, 5 (6-8), 200-212.
Wiegand, S. (1993). Die Conjoint-Analyse als Instrument zur Nutzenmessung – Ergebnisse einer Befragung in den neuen Bundesländern. In Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften e.V. (Hrsg.), Strukturanpassung der Land- und Ernährungswirtschaft in Mittel- und Osteuropa (Bd. 29, S. 459-470). Münster:???.
Wigton,
R.S., Hoellerich, V.L. & Patil, K.D. (1988). How
physicians use clinical information in diagnostic pulmonary embolism: An
application of conjoint analysis. In J. Dowie & A. Elstein (Eds.), Professional
judgment. A reader in clinical decision making
(pp. 130-149). Cambridge: University Press.
Wilcox, R.T. (1999). Efficient fee
structures for mutual funds. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software
Conference (No. 7, pp. 71-98). Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Wilensky, L. & Buttle, F.
(1988). A multivariate analysis of hotel benefit bundles and choice trade-offs.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 7 (1), 29-41.
Wiley, J.B. & Low, J.T.
(1983). A monté carlo simulation study of two approaches for aggregating
conjoint data. Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 405-416.
Wiley, J.B. & Wyner, J.L.
(1979). A generalized logit model to aggregate conjoint data. In N. Beckwith,
M. Houston, R. Mittelstaedt, K.B. Monroe & S. Ward (Eds.), 1979 AMA
Educators’ Proceedings (Series No. 44, pp. 78-82). Chicago, IL: American
Marketing Association.
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. (1993). A strategy for
a priori segmentation in conjoint analysis. In L. McAlister & M.L.
Rothschild (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (No. 20, pp. 142-148). Provo,
UT: 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., MacLachlan, D.L.
& Moinpour, R. (1977). Comparison of stated and inferred parameter values
in additive models: An illustration of a paradigm. In W.D. Perreault Jr. (Ed.),
Advances in consumer research (No. 4, pp. 98-105). Atlanta: Association
for Consumer Research.
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.
Williams, M. (1991). CONSURV:
Conjoint analysis software. Edmonton, Canada: Intelligent Marketing
Systems.
Williams, P. & Kilroy, D.
(2000). Calibrating price in ACA: The ACA price effect and how to manage it. In
Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference (No. 8, pp. 81-95). Sequim,
WA: Sawtooth Software.
Wilson, C. (1991). How market
modelling can cut strategic decision risks. Business Marketing Digest, 16
(4), 71-80.
Wilson, T.C. & Harris, B.F.
(1977). The application of additive conjoint analysis in marketing research:
Assumptions, advantages, and limitations. In B.A. Greenberg & D.N.
Bellenger (Eds.), 1977 AMA Educators’ Proceedings: Contemporary Marketing
Thought (Series No. 41, pp. 86-89). Chicago, IL: American Marketing
Association.
Wiltinger, K. (1997). Personalmarketing auf der Basis von Conjoint Analysen. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Ergänzungsheft (3), 55-78.
Wind, J. & Mahajan, V. (1990).
In supporting and improving the new product development process: Some
preliminary results. In B.D. Weinberg, Roles for research and models in
improving new product development. Marketing Science Institute Conference, May
21 and 22, 1990 (Report No. 90-120, pp. 2-19). Cambridge, MA: Marketing
Science Institute.
Wind, Y, Green, P.E., Shifflet, D.
& Scarbrough, M. (1989). Courtyard by Marriott: Designing a hotel facility
with consumer-based marketing models. Interface, 19 (1), 25-47.
Wind, Y. & Robinson, P.J.
(1972). Product positioning: An application of multidimensional scaling. In
R.I. Haley (Ed.), Attitude research in transition. Marketing research
techniques (No. 15., pp. 155-175). American Marketing Association.
Wind, Y. (1976). Preference for
relevant others and individual choice models. Journal of Consumer Research,
3, 50-57.
Wind, Y. (1977). Brand choice. In
National Science Foundation (Ed.), Selected aspects of consumer behavior: A
summary from the perspective of different disciplines (pp. 239-258). Washington
DC: Directorate for Research Applications, RANN - Research Applied to National
Needs.
Wind, Y., Green, P.E. &
Robinson, P.J. (1968). The determinants of vendor selection: The evaluation
function approach. Journal of Purchasing, 4, 29-41.
Wind, Y.J. (1990). Positioning
analysis and strategy. In G. Day, B. Weitz & R. Wensley (Eds.), The
interface of marketing and strategy (pp. 387-412). Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press.
Winzar, H.F. & Duncan, K.
(1992, November). Dichotomous responses in conjoint analysis. Paper
presented at the Proceedings of the Sixth New Zealand Marketing Educators'
Conference, University of Otago, Dunedin.
Winzar, H.F. & Johnson, L.W.
(1991, December). Testing convergent validity of self-explicated and
conjoint measures of multiattribute utility. Paper presented at the
Australian New Zealand Association of Management Educators' (ANZAME)
conference, Bond University.
Winzar, H.F. & Johnson, L.W.
(1992, July). Testing convergent validity of self-explicated and conjoint
measures of consumer utility. Paper presented at the TIMS Marketing Science
Conference, London Business School, London.
Winzar, H.F. & Johnson, L.W.
(1994, March). Evaluation of conjoint preference simulators. Paper
presented at the TIMS Marketing Science Conference, Karl Eller Graduate School
of Management, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
Winzar, H.F. & Johnson, L.W.
(1995, July). Incorporating individual differences in a multinomial probit
conjoint preferences simulator. Paper presented at the INFORMS Marketing
Science Conference, Australian Graduate School of Management, Sydney.
Winzar, H.F. & Johnson, L.W.
(1996). A variance based preference rule for conjoint analysis market share
prediction. In C. Riquier & B. Sharp (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1996
Australian Marketing Educators' Conference: Southern Marketing: Theory and
applications (No. 2, pp. 673-675). Adelaide: Marketing Science Centre,
University of South Australia.
Winzar, H.F. (1992a). Addressing
some puzzles in conjoint analysis. Australian Marketing Researcher, 14
(1), 54-67.
Winzar, H.F. (1992b, August). Testing
predictive validity of conjoint choice simulators: Building a model. Paper
presented at the PhD Colloquium, Murdoch University.
Winzar, H.F. (1992c, November). Testing
predictive validity of conjoint choice simulators: measurement issues. Paper
presented at the ANZDOC 92: the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Doctoral
Consortium, University of Otago, New Zealand.
Winzar, H.F. (1993a). Predictive
validity of conjoint choice simulators: A research design (Commerce School
Seminar Series). Murdoch University.
Winzar, H.F. (1993b). Validity
issues in conjoint choice simulators (Marketing Seminar Series). Australian
Graduate School of Management, University of New South Wales.
Winzar, H.F. (1994a). A monte
carlo evaluation of conjoint preference simulators. Unpublished Ph.D.
thesis, Graduate School of Business, The University of Sydney.
Winzar,
H.F. (1994b). Testing assumptions and predictive validity of
hybrid conjoint analysis. Unpublished Master's Thesis,
Bond University.
Winzar, H.F., Pidcock, P. &
Johnson, L. (1993). Modelling long distance preasure travel mode using
perceived modal attributes. Journal Travel & Tourism Marketing, 2
(1), 53-67.
Winzar, H.F., Pidcock, P.J. &
Karunaratna, A. (1991). Construct validity of conjoint analysis and self
explicated measures of consumer utility. Paper presented at the Marketing
Educators' Conference, Adelaide.
Wirth,
U. (1996). Kundenorientierte Produktgestaltung mittels Conjoint-Measurement:
Neuproduktplanung bei Mercedes-Benz. In H.H. Bauer, E. Dichtl & A. Herrmann
(Hrsg.), Automobilmarktforschung. Nutzenorientierung von PKW-Herstellern
(S. 53-66). München: Vahlen.
Witt,
K.J. (1992). Comment on Gates and Foytik. In M. Metegrano (Ed.), 1992
Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings (pp. 189-190). Ketchum, ID:
Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D. (2000). Predictive
validation of conjoint analysis. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software
Conference (No. 8, pp. 221-237). Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D.R. & Cattin, P.
(1981). Alternative estimation methods for conjoint analysis: A Monte Carlo
study. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 101-106.
Wittink, D.R. & Cattin, P.
(1989). Commercial use of conjoint analysis: An update. Journal of
Marketing, 53, 91-96.
Wittink, D.R. & Keil, S.K.
(2000). Continuous conjoint analysis. In A.
Gustafsson, A. Herrmann & F. Huber (Eds.), Conjoint measurement -
methods and applications (pp. 411-434). Berlin: Springer.
Wittink, D.R. & Montgomery,
D.T. (1979). Predictive validity of trade-off analysis for alternative
segmentation schemes. In N. Beckwith, M. Houston, R. Mittelstaedt, K.B. Monroe
& S. Ward (Eds.), 1979 Educators' Conference Proceedings (series 44,
pp. 69-73). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Wittink, D.R. & Seetharaman,
P.B. (1999). A comparison of alternative solutions to the number-of-levels
effect. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference (No. 7, pp.
269-282). Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D.R. & Walsh, J.W.
(1988). Conjoint analysis: Its reliability, validity, and usefulness. In R.M.
Johnson (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference of Perceptual
Mapping, Conjoint Analysis, and Computer Interviewing (No. 2, pp. 1-23). Ketchum,
ID: Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D.R. (1989). New book in
review: Analyzing decision making - metric conjoint analysis. Journal of
Marketing Research, 26, 244-253.
Wittink, D.R. (1991a). Comment on
Green, Schaffer, and Patterson. In M. Metegrano (Ed.), 1991 Sawtooth
Software Conference Proceedings (pp. 315-323). Ketchum, ID: Sawtooth
Software.
Wittink, D.R. (1991b). Attribute
level effects in conjoint results: The problem and possible solutions. In W.D.
Neal (Ed.), First Annual Advanced Research Techniques Forum, June 24-27,
1990, Beaver Creek, Colorado (pp. 43-54). Chicago, IL: American Marketing
Association.
Wittink, D.R. (1992). Comment on
Lewin, Jeuland, and Struhl. In M. Metegrano (Ed.), 1992 Sawtooth Software
Conference Proceedings (pp. 271-274). Ketchum, ID: Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D.R. (1999). Comment on
McCullough. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference (No. 7,
pp. 117-121). Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D.R., Huber, J., Fiedler,
J.A. & Miller, R. (1993a). Design effects in conjoint analysis. Working
paper, Graduate School of Management, Cornell University at Ithaca, NY.
Wittink, D.R., Huber, J., Fiedler,
J.A. & Miller, R. (1993b). The magnitude of and explanation / solution for
the number of levels effect in conjoint analysis. International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 30, ???.
Wittink, D.R., Huber, J., Zandan,
P. & Johnson, R.M. (1992). The number of levels effect in conjoint: Where
does it come from, and can it be eliminated? In M. Metegrano (Ed.), 1992
Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings (pp. 355-364). Ketchum, ID:
Sawtooth Software.
Wittink, D.R., Krishnamurthi, L.
& Nutter, J.B. (1982). Comparing derived importance weights across
attributes. Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 471-474.
Wittink, D.R., Krishnamurthi, L.
& Reibstein, D.J. (1989). The effect of differences in the number of
attribute levels on conjoint results. Marketing Letters, 1, 113-123.
Wittink, D.R., McLauchlan, B.
& Seetharaman, P.B. (1997). Solving the number of attribute levels problem
in conjoint. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference (No. 6).
Seattle, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Wittink,
D.R., Vriens, M. & Burhenne, W. (1994). Commercial
use of conjoint analysis in europe: Results and critical reflections. International
Journal of Research in Marketing, 11, 41-52.
Wittink,D.R. & Walsh, J.W.
(1988). Conjoint analysis: Its reliability, validity, and usefulness. In R.M.
Johnson (Ed.), Proceedings of Sawtooth Software Conference on Perceptual
Mapping, Conjoint Analysis, and Computer Interviewing (No. 2, pp. 1-25). Ketchum,
ID: Sawtooth Software.
Woehler, K. (1996). Präferenzen und Prädiktoren für umweltschonendes Verhalten von Urlaubern. Gruppendynamik, 27 (1), 21-32.
Wollerman,
P. (1999). Predicting product registration card response rates
with conjoint analysis. In Proceedings of the Sawtooth Software Conference
(No. 7, pp. 131-144). Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software.
Woodside, A. & Pearce, W.G.
(1989). Testing market segment acceptance of new designs of industrial
services. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 6, 185-201.
Woodside, A.G. & Carr, J.A.
(1988). Consumer decision making and competitive marketing strategies:
Applications for tourism planning. Journal of Travel Research, 2-7.
Woodside, A.G., Luikko, T. &
Vuori, R. (1999). Organizational buying of capital equipment
involving persons across several authority levels. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing, 14 (1), 30-49.
Woratschek,
H. (2000). Conjoint Measurement - ein Verfahren zur nachfrageorientierten
Preisbestimmung. In M.P. Büch (Hrsg.), Märkte und Organisationen im Sport:
Institutionenökonomische Ansätze (S. 77-101). Schorndorf: Hofmann.
Wright,
P. & Kriewall, M.A. (1980). State-of-mind effects on the
accuracy with which utility functions predict marketplace choice. Journal of
Marketing Research, 17, 277-293.
Wu,
C. & Wu, S.I. (1999). A proposed method for the design
of consumer products. Journal of International Marketing and Marketing
Research, 24 (1), 23-33.
Wuebker,
G. & Mahajan, V. (1999). A conjoint analysis-based
procedure to measure reservation price and to optimally price product bundles. In
R. Fuerderer, A. Herrmann & G. Wuebker (eds.), Optimal bundling -
marketing strategies for improving economic performance (pp. 157-176). Berlin: Springer.
Wyner,
G.A. (1992). Uses and limitations of conjoint analysis - Part I. Marketing
Research, June, 42-44.
Wyner,
G.A. (1992). Uses and limitations of conjoint analysis - Part II. Marketing
Research, September, 64-47.
Wyner,
G.A. (1995). Trade-off techniques and marketing issues. Marketing
Research, 7 (4), 32-34.
Wyner, G.A., Benedetti, L.H. &
Trapp, B.M. (1984). Measuring the quantity and mix of product demand. Journal
of Marketing, 48, 101-109.
X