IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v22y2017icp24-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deriving attribute utilities from mental representations of complex decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Dellaert, Benedict G.C.
  • Arentze, Theo
  • Horeni, Oliver
  • Timmermans, Harry J.P.

Abstract

We propose a new approach to determine the utilities that consumers attach to different attributes in complex decisions. The approach builds on a recently developed model that posits that cognitive links between alternatives and attributes and between attributes and benefits are more likely to be activated in a consumer's mental representation of a decision if the expected gains of taking into account these links in terms of achieving better choice outcomes are higher. In this paper we derive how this model can be used to determine the utility of attributes directly from mental representations and extend the model to complex decisions with multiple decision dimensions. We illustrate the approach using data on 594 individuals’ means–end chain responses for a hypothetical combined shopping location, shopping timing, and transportation decision problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Arentze, Theo & Horeni, Oliver & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2017. "Deriving attribute utilities from mental representations of complex decisions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 24-38.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:22:y:2017:i:c:p:24-38
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2016.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534516300513
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2016.12.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Arentze, Theo A. & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2008. "Shopping context and consumers’ mental representation of complex shopping trip decision problems," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 219-232.
    2. De Boeck, Paul & Bakker, Marjan & Zwitser, Robert & Nivard, Michel & Hofman, Abe & Tuerlinckx, Francis & Partchev, Ivailo, 2011. "The Estimation of Item Response Models with the lmer Function from the lme4 Package in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 39(i12).
    3. Joanna Coast & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Eileen J. Sutton & Susan A. Horrocks & A. Jane Vosper & Dawn R. Swancutt & Terry N. Flynn, 2012. "Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 730-741, June.
    4. Sandeep R. Chandukala & Yancy D. Edwards & Greg M. Allenby, 2011. "Identifying Unmet Demand," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 61-73, 01-02.
    5. Alba, Joseph W & Hutchinson, J Wesley, 1987. "Dimensions of Consumer Expertise," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(4), pages 411-454, March.
    6. Theo A. Arentze & Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Caspar G. Chorus, 2015. "Incorporating Mental Representations in Discrete Choice Models of Travel Behavior: Modeling Approach and Empirical Application," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 577-590, August.
    7. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Flynn, Terry, 2007. "Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1738-1753, April.
    8. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    9. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    10. Kessels, Roselinde & Jones, Bradley & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2009. "An Efficient Algorithm for Constructing Bayesian Optimal Choice Designs," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 27(2), pages 279-291.
    11. Andres Perea & Hans Peters & Tim Schulteis & Dries Vermeulen, 2006. "Stochastic dominance equilibria in two-person noncooperative games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 34(4), pages 457-473, November.
    12. Moorthy, Sridhar & Ratchford, Brian T & Talukdar, Debabrata, 1997. "Consumer Information Search Revisited: Theory and Empirical Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 23(4), pages 263-277, March.
    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. Wei Keat Benny Ng & Robin Junker & Rianne Appel-Meulenbroek & Myriam Cloodt & Theo Arentze, 2020. "Perceived benefits of science park attributes among park tenants in the Netherlands," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1196-1227, August.
    2. Diedericks, Lizette & Erasmus, Alet C. & Donoghue, Suné, 2020. "Now is the time to embrace interactive electronic applications of Association Pattern Technique," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    3. Wen Zhang & Nursitihazlin Ahmad Termida & Yusak O Susilo, 2019. "What construct one’s familiar area? A quantitative and longitudinal study," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(2), pages 322-340, February.

    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. Choudhary, Vidyanand & Currim, Imran & Dewan, Sanjeev & Jeliazkov, Ivan & Mintz, Ofer & Turner, John, 2017. "Evaluation Set Size and Purchase: Evidence from a Product Search Engine," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 16-31.
    2. Frank J. van Rijnsoever & Martin J. Dijst & Carolina Castaldi, 2009. "Involvement and use of multiple search channels in the automobile purchase process," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-06, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2009.
    3. Laura J. Kornish & Karl T. Ulrich, 2011. "Opportunity Spaces in Innovation: Empirical Analysis of Large Samples of Ideas," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 107-128, January.
    4. Magnini, Vincent P. & Karande, Kiran, 2011. "Understanding consumer services buyers based upon their purchase channel," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(6), pages 543-550, June.
    5. Gensler, Sonja & Neslin, Scott A. & Verhoef, Peter C., 2017. "The Showrooming Phenomenon: It's More than Just About Price," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 29-43.
    6. Jun B. Kim & Paulo Albuquerque & Bart J. Bronnenberg, 2010. "Online Demand Under Limited Consumer Search," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1001-1023, 11-12.
    7. 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.
    8. Pantelis P. Analytis & Amit Kothiyal & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos, 2014. "Multi-attribute utility models as cognitive search engines," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 403-419, September.
    9. Jie Jennifer Zhang & Bing Jing, 2007. "The Impacts of Shopbots on Online Consumer Search," Working Papers 07-34, NET Institute, revised Sep 2007.
    10. Hoeffler, Steve & Ariely, Dan & West, Pat, 2006. "Path dependent preferences: The role of early experience and biased search in preference development," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 215-229, November.
    11. Wiktor Adamowicz & David Bunch & Trudy Cameron & Benedict Dellaert & Michael Hanneman & Michael Keane & Jordan Louviere & Robert Meyer & Thomas Steenburgh & Joffre Swait, 2008. "Behavioral frontiers in choice modeling," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 215-228, December.
    12. Bronnenberg, Bart & Dube, Jean-Pierre, 2016. "The Formation of Consumer Brand Preferences," CEPR Discussion Papers 11648, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:403-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Kalyanam, Kirthi & Lenk, Peter & Rhee, Eddie, 2017. "Basket Composition and Choice Among Direct Channels: A Latent State Model of Shopping Costs," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 69-88.
    15. Hamilton, Rebecca W. & Puntoni, Stefano & Tavassoli, Nader T., 2010. "Categorization by groups and individuals," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 70-81, May.
    16. Aljukhadar, Muhammad & Senecal, Sylvain, 2016. "The user multifaceted expertise: Divergent effects of the website versus e-commerce expertise," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 322-332.
    17. Wirawan Dony Dahana & HeeJae Shin & Sotaro Katsumata, 2018. "Influence of individual characteristics on whether and how much consumers engage in showrooming behavior," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 665-692, December.
    18. Vermeulen, Bart & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2010. "Obtaining more information from conjoint experiments by best-worst choices," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1426-1433, June.
    19. Ben Casner, 2021. "Learning while shopping: an experimental investigation into the effect of learning on consumer search," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 238-273, March.
    20. Dellaert, B.G.C. & Baker, T. & Johnson, E.J., 2017. "Partitioning Sorted Sets: Overcoming Choice Overload while Maintaining Decision Quality," ERIM Report Series Research in Management 18-2, 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.
    21. Noble, Stephanie M. & Griffith, David A. & Weinberger, Marc G., 2005. "Consumer derived utilitarian value and channel utilization in a multi-channel retail context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(12), pages 1643-1651, December.

    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:eee:eejocm:v:22:y:2017:i:c:p:24-38. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    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.