IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arz/wpaper/eres2017_77.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A New Approach to Measure Preferences of Users in Built Environments: Integrating Cognitive Mapping and Utility Models

Author

Listed:
  • Benedict Dellaert
  • Theo Arentze
  • Oliver Horeni
  • Harry Timmermans

Abstract

The measurement of user preferences has received much attention in consumer research in areas such as housing, retailing, recreation and transportation. A method that is widely used to estimate preference values of attributes of locations, products or services is conjoint analysis. Measuring the preferences quantitatively the method allows real-estate suppliers to determine the relative importance of attributes for meeting the demand of users. As an exploratory tool, however, it has limitations, as the attributes included in choice experiments need to be pre-defined and must be limited in number. Therefore, a complementary stream of research has focused on cognitive mapping methods to elicit consumers’ considerations of attributes and benefits in choice situations.Arentze et al. (2008) and Dellaert et al. (2008) proposed a cognitive mapping method for revealing consumers’ mental representations of a choice problem in complex decisions. The so-called CNET method has similarities with means-end analysis. The cognitive mapping method does not impose restrictions on the number of attributes that can be included in the analysis. Furthermore, just as means-end analysis, it has the advantage of also revealing the benefits (reasons) underlying attribute considerations. On the other hand, it does not allow quantification of preference values and, hence, assessment of relative importance users associate to the attributes involved, as conjoint analysis does.To combine the specific strengths of the two methods (conjoint analysis and cognitive mapping), in the present paper, we propose a new approach. The approach builds on the theory underlying the CNET model which states that cognitive links between alternatives and attributes and between attributes and benefits are more likely to be activated in a consumer’s mental representation if the expected gains of taking into account these links in terms of achieving better choice outcomes are higher (Arentze et al. 2015). 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. In this way, the new method allows taking large sets of attributes into account and at the same time offers quantitative measurement of preferences. We illustrate the approach using data on 594 individuals’ means–end chain responses for a hypothetical shopping location decision problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedict Dellaert & Theo Arentze & Oliver Horeni & Harry Timmermans, 2017. "A New Approach to Measure Preferences of Users in Built Environments: Integrating Cognitive Mapping and Utility Models," ERES eres2017_77, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
  • Handle: RePEc:arz:wpaper:eres2017_77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eres.architexturez.net/doc/oai-eres-id-eres2017-77
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://eres.architexturez.net/system/files/77.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cognitive mapping; Preference measurement; Random-utility-maximization models; Shopping location choice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arz:wpaper:eres2017_77. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Architexturez Imprints (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eressea.html .

    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.