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. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    3. 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.
    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. 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.
    3. Greg Lewis & Bora Ozaltun & Georgios Zervas, 2021. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Differentiated Products Demand Systems," Papers 2111.12397, arXiv.org.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Luiz Diego Vidal Santos & Francisco Sandro Rodrigues Holanda & Catuxe Varjão Santana Oliveira & Alceu Pedrotti & Pedro Vinícius Bertulino Menezes & Ana Paula Schervinski Villwock, 2023. "Purchase intention of Amazon sustainable brands: a hybrid approach of structural equation modeling and Rasch model," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(12), pages 1-29, December.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Kashaev, Nail & Aguiar, Victor H., 2022. "A random attention and utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    14. Agossadou, A.J. & Fiamohe, R. & Tossou, H. & Kinkpe, T., 2018. "Agribusiness opportunities for youth in Nigeria: Farmers perceptions and willingness to pay for mechanized harvesting equipment," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277553, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Curt Hagquist & Raili Välimaa & Nina Simonsen & Sakari Suominen, 2017. "Differential Item Functioning in Trend Analyses of Adolescent Mental Health – Illustrative Examples Using HBSC-Data from Finland," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 10(3), pages 673-691, September.
    16. Timothy Park & Ashok K. Mishra & Shawn J. Wozniak, 2014. "Do farm operators benefit from direct to consumer marketing strategies?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 213-224, March.
    17. Wang, Luming & Finn, Adam, 2014. "A psychometric theory that measures up to marketing reality: An adapted Many Faceted IRT model," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 93-102.
    18. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    19. van der Kroon, Bianca & Brouwer, Roy & van Beukering, Pieter J.H., 2014. "The impact of the household decision environment on fuel choice behavior," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 236-247.
    20. Basu, Amiya & Mazumdar, Tridib & Raj, S.P., 2007. "Components of optimal price under logit demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(3), pages 1084-1106, November.

    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.