Advertisement

Optimal Designs for Second-Order Interactions in Paired Comparison Experiments with Binary Attributes

  • Eric NyarkoEmail author
  • Rainer Schwabe
Original Article
  • 46 Downloads

Abstract

In applications often paired comparisons involving competing options of either full or partial profiles are used. For this situation, we introduce an appropriate model and derive optimal designs in the presence of second-order interactions when all attributes are dichotomous.

Keywords

Attributes Full profile Interactions Optimal design Paired comparisons Partial profile Profile strength 

Mathematics Subject Classification

Primary: 62K05 Secondary: 62J15 62K15 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their thanks to the referees and the Editor in Chief for helpful comments. This work was partially supported by Grant—Doctoral Programmes in Germany, 2016/2017 (57214224)—of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Bradley RA, El-Helbawy AT (1976) Treatment contrasts in paired comparisons: basic procedures with application to factorials. Biometrika 63:255–262MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bradley RA, Terry ME (1952) Rank analysis of incomplete block designs: I. The method of paired comparisons. Biometrika 39:324–345MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chrzan K (2010) Using partial profile choice experiments to handle large numbers of attributes. Int J Mark Res 52:827–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    El-Helbawy AT, Bradley RA (1978) Treatment contrasts in paired comparisons: large-sample results, applications, and some optimal designs. J Am Stat Assoc 73:831–839MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elrod T, Louviere JJ, Davey KS (1992) An empirical comparison of ratings-based and choice-based conjoint models. J Mark Res 29:368–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Graßhoff U, Großmann H, Holling H, Schwabe R (2003) Optimal paired comparison designs for first-order interactions. Statistics 37:373–386MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Graßhoff U, Großmann H, Holling H, Schwabe R (2004) Optimal designs for main effects in linear paired comparison models. J Stat Plan Inference 126:361–376MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Green PE (1974) On the design of choice experiments involving multifactor alternatives. J Consum Res 1:61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Großmann H (2017) Partial-profile choice designs for estimating main effects and interactions of two-level attributes from paired comparison data. J Stat Theory Pract 11:236–253MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Großmann H (2018) A practical approach to designing partial-profile choice experiments with two alternatives for estimating main effects and interactions of many two-level attributes. J Choice Model. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2018.04.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Großmann H, Holling H, Schwabe R (2002) Advances in optimum experimental design for conjoint analysis and discrete choice models. In: Franses PH, Montgomery AL (eds) Advances in econometrics, vol 16. Econometric models in marketing. JAI Press, Amsterdam, pp 93–117Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Großmann H, Schwabe R (2015) Design for discrete choice experiments. In: Dean A, Morris M, Stufken J, Bingham D (eds) Handbook of design and analysis of experiments. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, pp 787–831zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kiefer J (1959) Optimum experimental designs. J R Stat Soc Ser B 21:272–304MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kiefer J, Wolfowitz J (1960) The equivalence of two extremum problems. Can J Math 12:363–366MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD (2000) Stated choice methods: analysis and application. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Offen W, Littell R (1987) Design of paired comparison experiments when treatments are levels of a single quantitative variable. J Stat Plan Inference 15:331–346MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Scheffé H (1952) An analysis of variance for paired comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc 47:381–400MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schwabe R (1996) Optimum designs for multi-factor models. Springer, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schwabe R, Graßhoff U, Großmann H, Holling H (2003) Optimal \(2^{K}\) paired comparison designs for partial profiles. In: PROBASTAT 2002. Proceedings of the fourth international conference on mathematical statistics, smolenice 2002, vol 26. Tatra Mountains Mathematical Publications, pp 79–86Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shiao SYPK, Ahn CW, Akazawa K (2007) Second-order interactions with the treatment groups in controlled clinical trials. Comput Methods Progr Biomed 86:10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Street DJ, Bunch DS, Moore BJ (2001) Optimal designs for \(2^{k}\) paired comparison experiments. Commun Stat Theory Methods 30:2149–2171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Street DJ, Burgess L (2007) The construction of optimal stated choice experiments: theory and methods. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thurstone LL (1927) A law of comparative judgment. Psychol Rev 34:368–389Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Train KE (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    van Berkum EEM (1987) Optimal paired comparison designs for factorial and quadratic models. J Stat Plan Inference 15:265–276MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    van Berkum EEM (1987) Optimal paired comparison designs for factorial experiments. CWI Tract 31, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Grace Scientific Publishing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Mathematical StochasticsUniversity of MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations