Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The no-choice option and dual response choice designs

Contents:

Author Info

  • Jeff Brazell
  • Christopher Diener
  • Ekaterina Karniouchina
  • William Moore
  • Válerie Séverin
  • Pierre-Francois Uldry

Abstract

Choice set designs that include a constant or no-choice option have increased efficiency, better mimic consumer choices, and allow one to model changes in market size. However, when the no-choice option is selected no information is obtained on the relative attractiveness of the available alternatives. One potential solution to this problem is to use a dual response format in which respondents first choose among a set of available alternatives in a forced-choice task and then choose among the available alternatives and a no-choice option. This paper uses a simulation to demonstrate and confirm the possible gains in efficiency of dual response over traditional choice-based conjoint tasks when there are different proportions choosing the no-choice option. Next, two choice-based conjoint analysis studies find little systematic violation of IIA with the addition/deletion of a no-choice option. Further analysis supports the hypothesis that selection of the no-choice option is more closely related to choice set attractiveness than to decision difficulty. Finally, validation evidence is presented. Our findings show that researchers can employ the dual response approach, taking advantages of the increased power of estimation, without concern for systematically biasing the resulting parameter estimates. Hence, we argue this is a valuable approach when there is the possibility of a large number of no-choices and preference heterogeneity. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11002-006-7943-8
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal Marketing Letters.

Volume (Year): 17 (2006)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
Pages: 255-268

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:17:y:2006:i:4:p:255-268

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100312

Related research

Keywords: Choice-based conjoint analysis; No-choice option; Choice models; Logit models;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Zsolt Sándor & Michel Wedel, 2002. "Profile Construction in Experimental Choice Designs for Mixed Logit Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 455-475, February.
  2. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. " Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 215-31, September.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Gensler, Sonja & Hinz, Oliver & Skiera, Bernd & Theysohn, Sven, 2012. "Willingness-to-pay estimation with choice-based conjoint analysis: Addressing extreme response behavior with individually adapted designs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(2), pages 368-378.
  2. Murray Rudd, 2011. "An Exploratory Analysis of Societal Preferences for Research-Driven Quality of Life Improvements in Canada," Social Indicators Research, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 127-153, March.
  3. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2013. "Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1148-1156.
  4. Stefanie Heinzle, 2012. "Disclosure of Energy Operating Cost Information: A Silver Bullet for Overcoming the Energy-Efficiency Gap?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 43-64, March.
  5. Kallas, Zein & Maria Gil, Jose, 2011. "A Dual Response Choice Experiments (DRCE) design to assess rabbit meat preference in Catalonia: A Heteroescedatistic Extreme-Value Model," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114779, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  6. Masiero, Lorenzo & Rose, John M., 2013. "The role of the reference alternative in the specification of asymmetric discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 83-92.
  7. Dan Marsh & Lena Mkwara & Riccardo Scarpa, 2011. "Do Respondents’ Perceptions of the Status Quo Matter in Non-Market Valuation with Choice Experiments? An Application to New Zealand Freshwater Streams," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(9), pages 1593-1615, September.
  8. Cantillo, Víctor & Amaya, Johanna & Ortúzar, J. de D., 2010. "Thresholds and indifference in stated choice surveys," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 753-763, July.
  9. Takanori Ida & Kosuke Takemura & Masayuki Sato, 2014. "Inner Conflict between Nuclear Power Generation and Electricity Rates: A Japanese Case Study," Discussion papers e-14-003, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:17:y:2006:i:4:p:255-268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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