Skip to main content
Log in

Nutzenermittlung in wahlbasierter Conjoint-Analyse: Ein Vergleich von Latent-Class- und hierarchischem Bayes-Verfahren

  • Conjoint-Analyse
  • Published:
Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Two different concepts of disentangling noise from systematic deviations in Choice-Based Conjoint evaluations are compared: The Latent Class Technique and the Hierarchical Bayes procedure. In addition, a probabilistic interpretation of LC estimates is presented as an interims model. Conceptual differences between these models are discussed and hypotheses on resulting differences in estimates are derived. These are tested in a large-scale empirical study. The relative performance is evaluated in two distinct application areas: segment/level and individual/level estimates. The expected patterns are confirmed only partly by empirical evidence. It is shown that the structure of the underlying heterogeneity concept influences the achievable outcomes. Contrary to expectations it is shown that the segment-level estimates are highly stable across methods. While individual Hierarchical Bayes estimates are often of questionable quality, they are to be preferred against the Latent Class estimates, because they detect outliers reasonably well and provide more flexibility in the data evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  • Allenby, Greg M./ Arora, Neeraj/ Ginter, James L. (1995), Incorporating Prior Knowledge into the Analysis of Conjoint Studies, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, S. 152–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allenby, Greg M./ Arora, Neeraj/ Ginter, James L. (1998), On the Heterogeneity of Demand, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 35, S. 384–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allenby, Greg M./ Ginter, James, L. (1995), Using Extremes to Design Products and Segment Markets, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, S. 39–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, Neeraj/ Allenby, Greg M./ Ginter, James (1998): A Hierarchical Bayes Model of Primary and Secondary Demand, in: Marketing Science, Vol. 17, S. 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arndt, Michael/Rogall, Holger (1986), Wohnungsbaugenossenschaften. Eine selbstverwaltete Unternehmensform zwischen bewohnerorientierter Tradition und sozialpolitischem Anspruch, Dissertation, FU-Berlin.

  • Bähr, Jürgen/ Kühl, Daniele/ Neumeyer, Michael (1992), Mietspiegel der Landeshauptstadt Kiel, Gutachten zur Ermittlung der ortsüblichen Vergleichsmieten im März 1992, Kieler Arbeitspapiere zur Landeskunde und Raumordnung, Vol. 26, Geographisches Institut der Universität Kiel.

  • Chib, Siddharta/ Greenberg, Edward S. (1995), Understanding the Metropolis-Hastings Algorithm, in: American Statistician, Vol. 49, S. 327–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSarbo, Waynes/ Ramaswamy, Venkatram/ Cohen, Salomon (1995), Market Segmentation with Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis, in: Marketing Letters, Vol. 6, S. 137–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeSarbo, Waynes/ Wedel, Michel/ Vriens, Marco/ Ramaswamy, Venkatram (1992), Latent Class Metric Conjoint Analysis, in: Marketing Letters, Vol. 3, S. 273–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elrod, Terry/Louviere, Jordan J./Davey, Krishnakumar S. (1992), An Empirical Comparison of Ratings-Based and Choice-Based Conjoint Models, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 29, S. 368–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, Andrew/Carlin, John B./Stern Hal S./Rubin, Donald B. (1995), Bayesian Data Analysis.

  • Green, Paul E./ Krieger, Abba M. (1991), Segmenting Markets with Conjoint Analysis, in: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55, p. 20–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haley, Russel I. (1968), Benefit segmentation: A decision oriented research tool, in: Journal of Marketing, S. 30–35.

  • Huber, Joel C./ Arora, Neeraj/ Johnson, Robert (1998), Capturing Heterogeneity in Consumer Choices, ART Forum, American Marketing Association.

  • Huber, Joel/ McCann, Jim (1982), The Impact of Inferential Beliefs on Product Evaluations, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19, S. 324–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, Joel/Wittink, Dick/Fiedler, John/Miller, Richard (1993), The Effectiveness of Alternative Preference Elicitation Procedures in Predicting Choice, in: Journal of Marketing Research, S. 105–114.

  • Johnson, Richard M. (1997), ICE: Individual Choice Estimation, Sawtooth Software, Sequim.

  • Johnson, Valen/Albert, James H. (1999), Ordinal Data Modeling.

  • Kamakura, Wagner/ Russell, Gary (1989), A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26, S. 379–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, Wagner/ Wedel, Michel/ Agrawal, Jagdish (1994), Concomitant Latent Class Models for Conjoint Analysis, in: International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 11, S. 451–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kistner, Klaus P. (1969), Faktorenanalyse und Wohnwert, Dissertation, Rheinische Friedrichs-Wilhelms-Universität: Bonn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krieger, Abba M./Green Paul E./Umesh, U. N. (1996), Effect of Level of Disaggregation on Conjoint Cross Validations: Some Comparative Findings, Paper presented in: Marketing Science Conference, Berkeley, May 1997.

  • Lenk, Peter J./ DeSarbo, Waynes S./ Green, Paul E./ Young, Martin (1996), Hierarchical Bayes Conjoint Analysis: Recovery of Part-worth Heterogeneity from Incomplete Design in Conjoint Analysis, in: Marketing Science, Vol. 15, S. 173–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindley, Dennis V./ Smith, Adrian F. (1972), Bayes Estimates for the Linear Models, in: Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B., Vol. 34, S. 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louviere, Jordan (1991), Experimental Choice Analysis: Introduction and Review, in: Journal of Business Research, Vol. 23, S. 291–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louviere, Jordan/ Woodworth, George (1983), Design and Analysis of Simulated Consumer Choice or Allocation Experiments: An Approach Based on Aggregate Data, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 20, S. 350–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, Daniel (1973), Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior, in: Zarembka, P. (Hrsg.), Frontiers in Economics, S. 105–142.

  • Molin, Eric J. E./ Oppewal, Harmen/ Timmermans, Harry (1996), Predicting Consumer Response to New Housing: A Stated Choice Experiment, in: Netherland Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, Vol. 11, S. 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramaswamy, Venkatram/ DeSarbo, Waynes/ Reibstein, David/ Robinson, William T. (1993), An Empirical Pooling Approach for Estimating Marketing Mix Elasticities with PIMS Data, in: Marketing Science, Vol. 12, S. 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renken, Tim (1997), Disaggregate Discrete Choice, in: Marketing Research, Spring, S. 18–22.

  • Sawtooth (1991), Choice Based Conjoint Analysis, Software, Sawtooth Software Inc., Ketchum, ID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawtooth (1997), Latent Class Segmentation Module, Software, Sawtooth Software Inc., Ketchum, ID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawtooth (1999), The CBC/HB Module for Hierarchical Bayes Estimation, Sawtooth Software, Ketchum, ID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan V./ Jain, Arun K./ Malhotra, Naresh K. (1983), Improving Predictive Power of Conjoint Analysis by Constrained Parameter Estimation, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 20, S. 433–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teichert, Thorsten (1998), Schätzgenauigkeit von Conjoint-Analysen, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Vol. 68, S. 1245–1266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teichert, Thorsten (2000), Das Latent-Class Verfahren zur Segmentierung von wahlbasierten Conjoint-Daten — Befunde einer empirischen Anwendung, Marketing — Zeitschrift für Forschung und Praxis, Heft 3.

  • Vriens, Marco/ Oppewal, Harmen/ Wedel, Michel (1998), Ratings-Based versus Choice-Based Latent Class Conjoint Models — An Empirical Comparison, in: Journal of the Market Research Society, Vol. 40, S. 237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vriens, Marco/ Wedel, Michel/ Wilms, Tom (1996), Metric Conjoint Segmentation Methods: A Monte Carlo Comparison, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 33, S. 73–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedel, Michel et al. (1998), Discrete and Continuous Representations of Unobserved Heterogeneity in Choice Modeling, in: Laurent, G. (Hrsg.), Marketing Letters, Special Issue on HEC Choice Symposium, Paris, S. 76–102.

  • Wedel, Michel/ Kistemaker, C. (1989), Consumer Benefit Segmentation using Clusterwise Linear Regression, in: International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 6, S. 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwerina, Klaus/ Huber, Joel C./ Kuhfeld, Warren (1996), A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs, Arbeitspapier, Duke University, Durham, NC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Dieser Beitrag entstand im Rahmen eines Forschungsaufenthaltes an der Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0120, U.S.A.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Teichert, T. Nutzenermittlung in wahlbasierter Conjoint-Analyse: Ein Vergleich von Latent-Class- und hierarchischem Bayes-Verfahren. Schmalenbachs Z betriebswirtsch Forsch 53, 798–822 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03372669

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03372669

JEL-Classification

Navigation