Marketing Letters

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 255–268

The no-choice option and dual response choice designs

  • Jeff D. Brazell
  • Christopher G. Diener
  • Ekaterina Karniouchina
  • William L. Moore
  • Válerie Séverin
  • Pierre-Francois Uldry
Article

DOI: 10.1007/s11002-006-7943-8

Cite this article as:
Brazell, J.D., Diener, C.G., Karniouchina, E. et al. Market Lett (2006) 17: 255. doi:10.1007/s11002-006-7943-8

Abstract

Choice set designs that include a constant or no-choice option have increased efficiency, better mimic consumer choices, and allow one to model changes in market size. However, when the no-choice option is selected no information is obtained on the relative attractiveness of the available alternatives. One potential solution to this problem is to use a dual response format in which respondents first choose among a set of available alternatives in a forced-choice task and then choose among the available alternatives and a no-choice option.

This paper uses a simulation to demonstrate and confirm the possible gains in efficiency of dual response over traditional choice-based conjoint tasks when there are different proportions choosing the no-choice option. Next, two choice-based conjoint analysis studies find little systematic violation of IIA with the addition/deletion of a no-choice option. Further analysis supports the hypothesis that selection of the no-choice option is more closely related to choice set attractiveness than to decision difficulty. Finally, validation evidence is presented. Our findings show that researchers can employ the dual response approach, taking advantages of the increased power of estimation, without concern for systematically biasing the resulting parameter estimates. Hence, we argue this is a valuable approach when there is the possibility of a large number of no-choices and preference heterogeneity.

Keywords

Choice-based conjoint analysisNo-choice optionChoice modelsLogit models

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeff D. Brazell
    • 1
  • Christopher G. Diener
    • 2
  • Ekaterina Karniouchina
    • 3
  • William L. Moore
    • 3
  • Válerie Séverin
    • 4
  • Pierre-Francois Uldry
    • 5
  1. 1.The Modellers, LLC.Salt Lake City
  2. 2.King, Brown, Partners, Inc.Salt Lake City
  3. 3.The David Eccles School of BusinessUniversity of UtahSalt Lake City
  4. 4.Research & Analytics, The Modellers, LLC.Salt Lake City
  5. 5.European Operations, The Modellers, LLC.Salt Lake City