Premium
Are Results from Non‐hypothetical Choice‐based Conjoint Analyses and Non‐hypothetical Recoded‐ranking Conjoint Analyses Similar?
Author(s) -
Akaichi Faical,
Nayga Rodolfo M.,
Gil José M.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
american journal of agricultural economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.949
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1467-8276
pISSN - 0002-9092
DOI - 10.1093/ajae/aat013
Subject(s) - conjoint analysis , choice set , ranking (information retrieval) , context (archaeology) , set (abstract data type) , willingness to pay , preference , econometrics , economics , computer science , microeconomics , artificial intelligence , paleontology , programming language , biology
Conflicting findings have been found in previous research that compared choice‐based conjoint analysis and ranking conjoint analysis in a public good setting. The present paper revisits this issue for a private good in a non‐hypothetical context using small and large choice sets. Our results suggest that in a small choice set setting, participants' preferences and willingness to pay are similar across the two conjoint analysis formats. However, in large choice sets, a divergence between the two conjoint analysis formats emerges. Hence, the two conjoint analysis formats can only be used interchangeably in small choice sets, not in large choice sets.