Do choice tasks and rating scales elicit the same judgments?

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Quentin F. Gronau, Murray S. Bennett, Scott D. Brown, Guy E. Hawkins, Ami Eidels
{"title":"Do choice tasks and rating scales elicit the same judgments?","authors":"Quentin F. Gronau,&nbsp;Murray S. Bennett,&nbsp;Scott D. Brown,&nbsp;Guy E. Hawkins,&nbsp;Ami Eidels","doi":"10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Discrete choice (DCE) and rating scale experiments (RSE) are commonly applied procedures for eliciting preference judgments in a plethora of applied settings such as consumer choices, health care, and transport economics. An almost universal assumption is that actual “ground truth” preferences do not depend on which elicitation procedure is used. It is usually not possible to test this assumption, because typical studies feature response options for which there is no objectively correct response. To make progress on testing this assumption, we conducted a perceptual discrimination experiment where response options varied on a single attribute – stimulus saturation level – with a known objectively correct response. We had the same participants complete both a choice task (CT) and rating scale (RS) version of the experiment, allowing a direct examination of the assumption of a common representation. Our CT featured many characteristics that define a DCE, however, in order to have a known objectively correct response, it also differed in a few important ways. To test the assumption of a common representation, we developed a cognitive model with a response mechanism for both CT and RS. This enabled us to compare a model version that featured one shared latent stimulus representation across CT and RS versus a version which featured separate representations. Our results support the assumption that a single internal state supports both CT and RS responses, and also suggest that the CT method might provide more sensitive measurement of internal states than the RS method.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46863,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Choice Modelling","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100437"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Choice Modelling","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534523000386","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Discrete choice (DCE) and rating scale experiments (RSE) are commonly applied procedures for eliciting preference judgments in a plethora of applied settings such as consumer choices, health care, and transport economics. An almost universal assumption is that actual “ground truth” preferences do not depend on which elicitation procedure is used. It is usually not possible to test this assumption, because typical studies feature response options for which there is no objectively correct response. To make progress on testing this assumption, we conducted a perceptual discrimination experiment where response options varied on a single attribute – stimulus saturation level – with a known objectively correct response. We had the same participants complete both a choice task (CT) and rating scale (RS) version of the experiment, allowing a direct examination of the assumption of a common representation. Our CT featured many characteristics that define a DCE, however, in order to have a known objectively correct response, it also differed in a few important ways. To test the assumption of a common representation, we developed a cognitive model with a response mechanism for both CT and RS. This enabled us to compare a model version that featured one shared latent stimulus representation across CT and RS versus a version which featured separate representations. Our results support the assumption that a single internal state supports both CT and RS responses, and also suggest that the CT method might provide more sensitive measurement of internal states than the RS method.

选择任务和评分量表是否会引发相同的判断?
离散选择(DCE)和评分量表实验(RSE)是在消费者选择、医疗保健和交通经济等众多应用环境中引发偏好判断的常用程序。一个几乎普遍的假设是,实际的“基本真相”偏好并不取决于使用哪种启发程序。通常不可能检验这一假设,因为典型的研究以没有客观正确反应的反应选项为特征。为了在测试这一假设方面取得进展,我们进行了一项感知辨别实验,在该实验中,反应选项在单一属性(刺激饱和水平)上变化,具有已知的客观正确反应。我们让相同的参与者完成实验的选择任务(CT)和评分量表(RS)版本,从而可以直接检查共同表示的假设。我们的CT具有许多定义DCE的特征,然而,为了获得已知的客观正确的反应,它在一些重要方面也有所不同。为了测试共同表征的假设,我们开发了一个具有CT和RS反应机制的认知模型。这使我们能够比较CT和RS之间具有一个共享潜在刺激表征的模型版本与具有单独表征的版本。我们的结果支持了单个内部状态同时支持CT和RS响应的假设,也表明CT方法可能比RS方法提供更灵敏的内部状态测量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
31
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信