IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v27y2008i3p443-460.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Offering Online Recommendations with Minimum Customer Input Through Conjoint-Based Decision Aids

Author

Listed:
  • Arnaud De Bruyn

    (Department of Marketing, ESSEC Business School, 95000 Cergy, France)

  • John C. Liechty

    (Smeal College of Business, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802)

  • Eelko K. R. E. Huizingh

    (Department of Business Development, University of Groningen, 9700 AV Groningen, The Netherlands)

  • Gary L. Lilien

    (Smeal College of Business, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802)

Abstract

In their purchase decisions, online customers seek to improve decision quality while limiting search efforts. In practice, many merchants have understood the importance of helping customers in the decision-making process and provide online decision aids to their visitors. In this paper, we show how preference models which are common in conjoint analysis can be leveraged to design a questionnaire-based decision aid that elicits customers' preferences based on simple demographics, product usage, and self-reported preference questions. Such a system can offer relevant recommendations quickly and with minimal customer input. We compare three algorithms—cluster classification, Bayesian treed regression, and stepwise componential regression—to develop an optimal sequence of questions and predict online visitors' preferences. In an empirical study, stepwise componential regression, relying on many fewer and easier-to-answer questions, achieved predictive accuracy equivalent to a traditional conjoint approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Arnaud De Bruyn & John C. Liechty & Eelko K. R. E. Huizingh & Gary L. Lilien, 2008. "Offering Online Recommendations with Minimum Customer Input Through Conjoint-Based Decision Aids," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 443-460, 05-06.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:27:y:2008:i:3:p:443-460
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1070.0306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1070.0306
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.1070.0306?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olivier Toubia & Duncan I. Simester & John R. Hauser & Ely Dahan, 2003. "Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 273-303.
    2. Kohsuke Ogawa, 1987. "An Approach to Simultaneous Estimation and Segmentation in Conjoint Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 66-81.
    3. John G. Lynch , Jr. & Dan Ariely, 2000. "Wine Online: Search Costs Affect Competition on Price, Quality, and Distribution," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 83-103, April.
    4. Chuan He & Yuxin Chen, 2006. "Research Note—Managing e-Marketplace: A Strategic Analysis of Nonprice Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 175-187, 03-04.
    5. Stephen J. Hoch & David A. Schkade, 1996. "A Psychological Approach to Decision Support Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 51-64, January.
    6. Diehl, Kristin & Kornish, Laura J & Lynch, John G, Jr, 2003. "Smart Agents: When Lower Search Costs for Quality Information Increase Price Sensitivity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(1), pages 56-71, June.
    7. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    8. Wayne DeSarbo & Richard Oliver & Arvind Rangaswamy, 1989. "A simulated annealing methodology for clusterwise linear regression," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 707-736, September.
    9. Gerald Häubl & Valerie Trifts, 2000. "Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 4-21, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pantano, Eleonora & Pizzi, Gabriele, 2020. "Forecasting artificial intelligence on online customer assistance: Evidence from chatbot patents analysis," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    2. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    3. Eleanor McDonnell Feit & Mark A. Beltramo & Fred M. Feinberg, 2010. "Reality Check: Combining Choice Experiments with Market Data to Estimate the Importance of Product Attributes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 785-800, May.
    4. Jella Pfeiffer & Michael Scholz, 2013. "A Low-Effort Recommendation System with High Accuracy," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(6), pages 397-408, December.
    5. Murray, Kyle B. & Häubl, Gerald, 2009. "Personalization without Interrogation: Towards more Effective Interactions between Consumers and Feature-Based Recommendation Agents," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 138-146.
    6. Jella Pfeiffer & Thies Pfeiffer & Martin Meißner & Elisa Weiß, 2020. "Eye-Tracking-Based Classification of Information Search Behavior Using Machine Learning: Evidence from Experiments in Physical Shops and Virtual Reality Shopping Environments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 675-691, September.
    7. Oded Netzer & Olivier Toubia & Eric Bradlow & Ely Dahan & Theodoros Evgeniou & Fred Feinberg & Eleanor Feit & Sam Hui & Joseph Johnson & John Liechty & James Orlin & Vithala Rao, 2008. "Beyond conjoint analysis: Advances in preference measurement," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 337-354, December.
    8. Aksoy, Lerzan & Cooil, Bruce & Lurie, Nicholas H., 2011. "Decision Quality Measures in Recommendation Agents Research," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 110-122.
    9. Xingyue (Luna) Zhang & James A. Dearden & Yuliang Yao, 2022. "Let them stay or let them go? Online retailer pricing strategy for managing stockouts," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(11), pages 4173-4190, November.
    10. Scholz, Michael & Dorner, Verena & Schryen, Guido & Benlian, Alexander, 2017. "A configuration-based recommender system for supporting e-commerce decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 205-215.
    11. Lurie, Nicholas H. & Wen, Na, 2014. "Simple Decision Aids and Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 511-523.
    12. Daria Dzyabura & John R. Hauser, 2019. "Recommending Products When Consumers Learn Their Preference Weights," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(3), pages 417-441, May.
    13. Ronny Baierl, 2018. "Understanding Entrepreneurial Team Decisions: Measuring Team Members’ Influences With The Metricized Limit Conjoint Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Donald R. Lehmann, 2004. "Reactance to Recommendations: When Unsolicited Advice Yields Contrary Responses," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 82-94, September.
    2. Murray, Kyle B. & Häubl, Gerald, 2009. "Personalization without Interrogation: Towards more Effective Interactions between Consumers and Feature-Based Recommendation Agents," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 138-146.
    3. Alan L. Montgomery & Kartik Hosanagar & Ramayya Krishnan & Karen B. Clay, 2004. "Designing a Better Shopbot," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 189-206, February.
    4. Eric Johnson & Suzanne Shu & Benedict Dellaert & Craig Fox & Daniel Goldstein & Gerald Häubl & Richard Larrick & John Payne & Ellen Peters & David Schkade & Brian Wansink & Elke Weber, 2012. "Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 487-504, June.
    5. Lurie, Nicholas H. & Wen, Na, 2014. "Simple Decision Aids and Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 511-523.
    6. Suri, Rajneesh & Cai, Jane Zhen & Monroe, Kent B. & Thakor, Mrugank V., 2012. "Retailers’ Merchandise Organization and Price Perceptions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 168-179.
    7. Viswanath Venkatesh & Ritu Agarwal, 2006. "Turning Visitors into Customers: A Usability-Centric Perspective on Purchase Behavior in Electronic Channels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 367-382, March.
    8. Tianshi Li & Wenli Li & Yuqing Zhao & Jingpei Ma, 2023. "Rationality manipulation during consumer decision-making process: an analysis of Alibaba’s online shopping carnival," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 331-364, March.
    9. Punj, Girish & Moore, Robert, 2009. "Information search and consideration set formation in a web-based store environment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(6), pages 644-650, June.
    10. Dimitrios Tsekouras & Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Bas Donkers & Gerald Häubl, 2020. "Product set granularity and consumer response to recommendations," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 186-202, March.
    11. Koehler, C.F. & Breugelmans, E. & Dellaert, B.G.C., 2010. "Consumer Acceptance of Recommendations by Interactive Decision Aids: The Joint Role of Temporal Distance and Concrete vs. Abstract Communications," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-041-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    12. Hallikainen, Heli & Luongo, Milena & Dhir, Amandeep & Laukkanen, Tommi, 2022. "Consequences of personalized product recommendations and price promotions in online grocery shopping," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    13. Peter J. Danaher & Isaac W. Wilson & Robert A. Davis, 2003. "A Comparison of Online and Offline Consumer Brand Loyalty," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 461-476, February.
    14. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann, 2007. "Die Zufriedenheit mit dem Entscheidungsprozess als Determinante der Kundenbindung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 530-566, August.
    15. Tuck Siong Chung & Roland T. Rust & Michel Wedel, 2009. "My Mobile Music: An Adaptive Personalization System for Digital Audio Players," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 52-68, 01-02.
    16. Aby Abraham & Sanjay Patro, 2014. "‘Country-of-Origin’ Effect and Consumer Decision-making," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 39(3), pages 309-318, August.
    17. Shiri Melumad & Rhonda Hadi & Christian Hildebrand & Adrian F. Ward, 2020. "Technology-Augmented Choice: How Digital Innovations Are Transforming Consumer Decision Processes," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 7(3), pages 90-101, October.
    18. Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Suzanne B. Shu & Theo A. Arentze & Tom Baker & Kristin Diehl & Bas Donkers & Nathanael J. Fast & Gerald Häubl & Heidi Johnson & Uma R. Karmarkar & Harmen Oppewal & Bernd H. S, 2020. "Consumer decisions with artificially intelligent voice assistants," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 335-347, December.
    19. Hauser, John R., 2014. "Consideration-set heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1688-1699.
    20. Lior Fink & Daniele Papismedov, 2023. "On the Same Page? What Users Benefit from a Desktop View on Mobile Devices," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 423-441, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:27:y:2008:i:3:p:443-460. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.