IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v52y2018i3d10.1007_s11135-017-0514-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of four common data collection techniques to elicit preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Pasquale Anselmi

    (University of Padua)

  • Luigi Fabbris

    (University of Padua)

  • Maria Cristiana Martini

    (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia)

  • Egidio Robusto

    (University of Padua)

Abstract

We compare four common data collection techniques to elicit preferences: the rating of items, the ranking of items, the partitioning of a given amount of points among items, and a reduced form of the technique for comparing items in pairs. University students were randomly assigned a questionnaire employing one of the four techniques. All questionnaires incorporated the same collection of items. The data collected with the four techniques were converted into analogous preference matrices, and analyzed with the Bradley–Terry model. The techniques were evaluated with respect to the fit to the model, the precision and reliability of the item estimates, and the consistency among the produced item sequences. The rating, ranking and budget partitioning techniques performed similarly, whereas the reduced pair comparisons technique performed a little worse. The item sequence produced by the rating technique was very close to the sequence obtained averaging over the three other techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Pasquale Anselmi & Luigi Fabbris & Maria Cristiana Martini & Egidio Robusto, 2018. "Comparison of four common data collection techniques to elicit preferences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 1227-1239, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:52:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-017-0514-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-017-0514-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-017-0514-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-017-0514-7?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. Yoshio Takane, 1982. "Maximum likelihood additivity analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 225-241, September.
    2. Aloysius, John A. & Davis, Fred D. & Wilson, Darryl D. & Ross Taylor, A. & Kottemann, Jeffrey E., 2006. "User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: The impact of preference elicitation techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 273-285, February.
    3. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    4. Mickael Bech & Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen & Trine Kjær & Jørgen Lauridsen & Jan Sørensen, 2007. "Graded pairs comparison ‐ does strength of preference matter? Analysis of preferences for specialised nurse home visits for pain management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 513-529, May.
    5. David Andrich, 1978. "A rating formulation for ordered response categories," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 43(4), pages 561-573, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Vredin Johansson, Maria & Heldt, Tobias & Johansson, Per, 2006. "The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 507-525, July.
    2. Toni Mora & Beatriz G. Lopez‐Valcarcel, 2018. "Breakfast choice: An experiment combining a nutritional training workshop targeting adolescents and the promotion of unhealthy products," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 306-319, February.
    3. Vij, Akshay & Walker, Joan L., 2016. "How, when and why integrated choice and latent variable models are latently useful," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 192-217.
    4. Karing’u kelvin Njuguna & Hezron Nyarindo Isaboke & Samuel Njiri Ndirangu, 2022. "Determinants of smallholders’ choice of avocado marketing outlets and profitability in Murang’a County, Kenya," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(8), pages 1-25, August.
    5. Ariane Lambert Mogiliansky & Shmuel Zamir & Herve Zwirn, 2003. "Type Indeterminacy: A Model of the KT(Kahneman-Tversky)-man," Discussion Paper Series dp343, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    6. Greg Lewis & Bora Ozaltun & Georgios Zervas, 2021. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Differentiated Products Demand Systems," Papers 2111.12397, arXiv.org.
    7. Eun-Young Park & Soojung Chae, 2020. "Rasch Analysis of the Korean Parenting Stress Index Short Form (K-PSI-SF) in Mothers of Children with Cerebral Palsy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-11, September.
    8. P. A. Ferrari & S. Salini, 2008. "Measuring Service Quality: The Opinion of Europeans about Utilities," Working Papers 2008.36, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren Bøye Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2016. "Integrating sensory evaluations in incentivized discrete choice experiments to assess consumer demand for cricket flour buns in Kenya," IFRO Working Paper 2016/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    10. Chang, Hsin-Li & Yang, Cheng-Hua, 2008. "Explore airlines’ brand niches through measuring passengers’ repurchase motivation—an application of Rasch measurement," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 105-112.
    11. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    12. Akinwehinmi, Oluwagbenga & Ogundari, Kolawole & Amos, Taiwo, 2021. "Consumers' Food Control Risk Perception and Preference for Government-Controlled Safety Certification in Emerging Food Markets," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315312, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Ivana Bassi & Matteo Carzedda & Enrico Gori & Luca Iseppi, 2022. "Rasch analysis of consumer attitudes towards the mountain product label," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, December.
    14. Pons-Seres de Brauwer, C. & Cohen, J.J., 2020. "Analysing the potential of citizen-financed community renewable energy to drive Europe's low-carbon energy transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    15. Ericka Costa & Dario Montemurro & Diego Giuliani, 2019. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for green cars: a discrete choice analysis in Italy," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 2425-2442, October.
    16. Antonio Caronni & Marina Ramella & Pietro Arcuri & Claudia Salatino & Lucia Pigini & Maurizio Saruggia & Chiara Folini & Stefano Scarano & Rosa Maria Converti, 2023. "The Rasch Analysis Shows Poor Construct Validity and Low Reliability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 (QUEST 2.0) Questionnaire," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-19, January.
    17. Peschel, Anne O. & Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2015. "A Behavioral Approach to Understanding Green Consumerism Using Latent Class Choice Analysis," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202727, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Wanke, Peter Fernandes & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel José & Moreira Antunes, Jorge Junio & Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz & Roubaud, David & Sobreiro, Vinicius Amorim & Santibanez Gonzalez‬, Erne, 2021. "An original information entropy-based quantitative evaluation model for low-carbon operations in an emerging market," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    19. Hua-Hua Chang, 1996. "The asymptotic posterior normality of the latent trait for polytomous IRT models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 445-463, September.
    20. Honora Smith & Christine Currie & Pornpimol Chaiwuttisak & Andreas Kyprianou, 2018. "Patient choice modelling: how do patients choose their hospitals?," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 259-268, 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:spr:qualqt:v:52:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-017-0514-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.