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.
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.
Allenby, Greg M./ Arora, Neeraj/ Ginter, James L. (1998), On the Heterogeneity of Demand, in: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 35, S. 384–389.
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.
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.
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.
DeSarbo, Waynes/ Ramaswamy, Venkatram/ Cohen, Salomon (1995), Market Segmentation with Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis, in: Marketing Letters, Vol. 6, S. 137–147.
DeSarbo, Waynes/ Wedel, Michel/ Vriens, Marco/ Ramaswamy, Venkatram (1992), Latent Class Metric Conjoint Analysis, in: Marketing Letters, Vol. 3, S. 273–288.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Kistner, Klaus P. (1969), Faktorenanalyse und Wohnwert, Dissertation, Rheinische Friedrichs-Wilhelms-Universität: Bonn.
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.
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.
Louviere, Jordan (1991), Experimental Choice Analysis: Introduction and Review, in: Journal of Business Research, Vol. 23, S. 291–297.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sawtooth (1997), Latent Class Segmentation Module, Software, Sawtooth Software Inc., Ketchum, ID.
Sawtooth (1999), The CBC/HB Module for Hierarchical Bayes Estimation, Sawtooth Software, Ketchum, ID.
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.
Teichert, Thorsten (1998), Schätzgenauigkeit von Conjoint-Analysen, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Vol. 68, S. 1245–1266.
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.
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.
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.
Zwerina, Klaus/ Huber, Joel C./ Kuhfeld, Warren (1996), A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs, Arbeitspapier, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
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
About this article
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
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03372669