IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Greedoid-Based Noncompensatory Inference

  • Michael Yee

    ()

    (Lincoln Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 244 Wood Street, Lexington, Massachusetts 02420-9108)

  • Ely Dahan

    ()

    (UCLA Anderson School, 110 Westwood Plaza, B-514, Los Angeles, California 90095)

  • John R. Hauser

    ()

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, E40-179, 50 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

  • James Orlin

    ()

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, E53-363, 50 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

Greedoid languages provide a basis to infer best-fitting noncompensatory decision rules from full-rank conjoint data or partial-rank data such as consider-then-rank, consider-only, or choice data. Potential decision rules include elimination by aspects, acceptance by aspects, lexicographic by features, and a mixed-rule lexicographic by aspects (LBA) that nests the other rules. We provide a dynamic program that makes estimation practical for a moderately large numbers of aspects. We test greedoid methods with applications to SmartPhones (339 respondents, both full-rank and consider-then-rank data) and computers (201 respondents from Lenk et al. 1996). We compare LBA to two compensatory benchmarks: hierarchical Bayes ranked logit (HBRL) and LINMAP. For each benchmark, we consider an unconstrained model and a model constrained so that aspects are truly compensatory. For both data sets, LBA predicts (new task) holdouts at least as well as compensatory methods for the majority of the respondents. LBA's relative predictive ability increases (ranks and choices) if the task is full rank rather than consider then rank. LBA's relative predictive ability does not change if (1) we allow respondents to presort profiles, or (2) we increase the number of profiles in a consider-then-rank task from 16 to 32. We examine trade-offs between effort and accuracy for the type of task and the number of profiles.

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://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0213
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Marketing Science.

Volume (Year): 26 (2007)
Issue (Month): 4 (07-08)
Pages: 532-549

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:26:y:2007:i:4:p:532-549
Contact details of provider: Postal:
7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

Phone: +1-443-757-3500
Fax: 443-757-3515
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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. Toubia, Olivier & Simester, Duncan & Hauser, John & Dahan, Ely, 2003. "Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation," Working papers 4171-01, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
  2. Theodoros Evgeniou & Constantinos Boussios & Giorgos Zacharia, 2005. "Generalized Robust Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 415-429, May.
  3. Peter C. Fishburn, 1974. "Exceptional Paper--Lexicographic Orders, Utilities and Decision Rules: A Survey," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(11), pages 1442-1471, July.
  4. Wayne DeSarbo & Donald Lehmann & Gregory Carpenter & Indrajit Sinha, 1996. "A stochastic multidimensional unfolding approach for representing phased decision outcomes," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 485-508, September.
  5. Nakamura, Yutaka, 2002. "Lexicographic quasilinear utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 157-178, May.
  6. Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2004. "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 391-406, October.
  7. Bettman, James R & Park, C Whan, 1980. " Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 234-48, December.
  8. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(3), pages 337-369, September.
  9. Dapeng Cui & David Curry, 2005. "Prediction in Marketing Using the Support Vector Machine," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 595-615, January.
  10. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
  11. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. " Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
  12. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. " The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
  13. Peter J. Lenk & Wayne S. DeSarbo & Paul E. Green & Martin R. Young, 1996. "Hierarchical Bayes Conjoint Analysis: Recovery of Partworth Heterogeneity from Reduced Experimental Designs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 173-191.
  14. John C. Liechty & Duncan K. H. Fong & Wayne S. DeSarbo, 2005. "Dynamic Models Incorporating Individual Heterogeneity: Utility Evolution in Conjoint Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 285-293, November.
  15. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. " An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
  16. Johnson, Eric J & Meyer, Robert J, 1984. " Compensatory Choice Models of Noncompensatory Processes: The Effect of Varying Context," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 528-41, June.
  17. Dennis H. Gensch, 1987. "A Two-Stage Disaggregate Attribute Choice Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 223-239.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:26:y:2007:i:4:p:532-549. 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: (Mirko Janc)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.