Cross-Validation Assessment of Alternatives to Individual-Level Conjoint Analysis: A Case Study
Open Access
- 1 August 1989
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Marketing Research
- Vol. 26 (3) , 346-350
- https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378902600308
Abstract
Recently, both Hagerty and Kamakura have proposed insightful suggestions for improving the predictive accuracy of conjoint analysis via various types of averaging of individual responses. Hagerty uses Q-type factor analysis (i.e., optimal weighting) and Kamakura a hierarchical cluster analysis that optimizes predictive validity. Both approaches are compared with conventional conjoint and self-explicated utility models using real datasets. Neither the Hagerty nor the Kamakura suggestions lead to higher predictive validities than are obtained by conventional conjoint analysis applied to individual response data.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Least Squares Procedure for Benefit Segmentation with Conjoint ExperimentsJournal of Marketing Research, 1988
- Reliability and Validity of Conjoint Analysis and Self-Explicated Weights: A ComparisonJournal of Marketing Research, 1984
- Using Segmentation Approaches for Better Prediction and Understanding from Consumer Mode Choice ModelsJournal of Marketing Research, 1981
- A Hybrid Utility Estimation Model for Conjoint AnalysisJournal of Marketing, 1981
- Levels of Aggregation in Conjoint Analysis: An Empirical ComparisonJournal of Marketing Research, 1980
- Componential Segmentation in the Analysis of Consumer Trade-OffsJournal of Marketing, 1979
- Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and OutlookJournal of Consumer Research, 1978
- A new approach to market segmentationBusiness Horizons, 1977
- Linear Programming Techniques for Multidimensional Analysis of PreferencesPsychometrika, 1973
- Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective FunctionJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1963