Reference Dependence and Conjoint Analysis

Q4 Business, Management and Accounting
Brennan Davis, Imran S. Currim, R. Sarin
{"title":"Reference Dependence and Conjoint Analysis","authors":"Brennan Davis, Imran S. Currim, R. Sarin","doi":"10.1515/1546-5616.1141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although there is enormous evidence that reference levels influence preferences, conjoint models, one of the most successful marketing research tools, assume that preferences depend on the absolute levels of attributes. In this paper we investigate the relevance of reference effects in two settings, compositional or self-explicated models in experimental studies 1 and 2, and decompositional or choice-based models in experimental study 3. In particular, we introduce a simple modification of the traditional self-explicated conjoint model which permits dependence of preference on reference levels. By eliciting gains and losses from expectations the model is adaptable to changes in respondents' reference points, which the traditional model is incapable of. Reference options are found to clearly affect subject choices in studies 1 and 2. In addition, the reference dependent self-explicated model is found to offer useful predictions when reference points are manipulated in study 1, and improve on predictions of its traditional counterpart when reference points are measured in study 2. In contrast, in study 3, the choice-based model’s diagnostics and predictions are found to be robust to reference point manipulations. Taken together, these results suggest that the self-explicated model is more suited than the choice-based model to understanding and predicting how respondents make judgments relative to reference points because reference points and gains and losses from reference levels are more salient in the self-explicated model. We discuss implications for managers constructing conjoint models in product-market settings wherein reference points are changing due to new product introductions or marketing efforts.","PeriodicalId":35829,"journal":{"name":"Review of Marketing Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/1546-5616.1141","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Marketing Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/1546-5616.1141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Although there is enormous evidence that reference levels influence preferences, conjoint models, one of the most successful marketing research tools, assume that preferences depend on the absolute levels of attributes. In this paper we investigate the relevance of reference effects in two settings, compositional or self-explicated models in experimental studies 1 and 2, and decompositional or choice-based models in experimental study 3. In particular, we introduce a simple modification of the traditional self-explicated conjoint model which permits dependence of preference on reference levels. By eliciting gains and losses from expectations the model is adaptable to changes in respondents' reference points, which the traditional model is incapable of. Reference options are found to clearly affect subject choices in studies 1 and 2. In addition, the reference dependent self-explicated model is found to offer useful predictions when reference points are manipulated in study 1, and improve on predictions of its traditional counterpart when reference points are measured in study 2. In contrast, in study 3, the choice-based model’s diagnostics and predictions are found to be robust to reference point manipulations. Taken together, these results suggest that the self-explicated model is more suited than the choice-based model to understanding and predicting how respondents make judgments relative to reference points because reference points and gains and losses from reference levels are more salient in the self-explicated model. We discuss implications for managers constructing conjoint models in product-market settings wherein reference points are changing due to new product introductions or marketing efforts.
参考依赖与联合分析
虽然有大量证据表明参考水平会影响偏好,但作为最成功的营销研究工具之一,联合模型假设偏好取决于属性的绝对水平。在本文中,我们研究了参考效应在两种情况下的相关性,即实验研究1和2中的成分或自解释模型,以及实验研究3中的分解或基于选择的模型。特别地,我们引入了传统自显式联合模型的一个简单修改,该模型允许依赖于参考水平的偏好。通过从预期中得出收益和损失,该模型可以适应受访者参考点的变化,这是传统模型无法做到的。在研究1和研究2中,我们发现参考选项明显影响受试者的选择。此外,在研究1中,当参考点被操纵时,发现参考依赖自显式模型提供了有用的预测,并在研究2中测量参考点时改进了传统对应模型的预测。相比之下,在研究3中,发现基于选择的模型的诊断和预测对参考点操作具有鲁棒性。综上所述,这些结果表明,自解释模型比基于选择的模型更适合于理解和预测受访者如何相对于参考点做出判断,因为参考点和参考水平的得失在自解释模型中更为突出。我们讨论了在产品-市场环境中,参考点由于新产品的引入或营销努力而发生变化,从而对管理者构建联合模型的影响。
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
Review of Marketing Science
Review of Marketing Science Business, Management and Accounting-Marketing
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Review of Marketing Science (ROMS) is a peer-reviewed electronic-only journal whose mission is twofold: wide and rapid dissemination of the latest research in marketing, and one-stop review of important marketing research across the field, past and present. Unlike most marketing journals, ROMS is able to publish peer-reviewed articles immediately thanks to its electronic format. Electronic publication is designed to ensure speedy publication. It works in a very novel and simple way. An issue of ROMS opens and then closes after a year. All papers accepted during the year are part of the issue, and appear as soon as they are accepted. Combined with the rapid peer review process, this makes for quick dissemination.
×
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