Test-Retest Reliability in Metric Conjoint Experiments: A New Workflow to Evaluate Confidence in Model Results

IF 7.8 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
J. Schüler, B. Anderson, Charles Y. Murnieks, Matthias Baum, A. Küsshauer
{"title":"Test-Retest Reliability in Metric Conjoint Experiments: A New Workflow to Evaluate Confidence in Model Results","authors":"J. Schüler, B. Anderson, Charles Y. Murnieks, Matthias Baum, A. Küsshauer","doi":"10.1177/10422587231184071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Metric conjoint studies are a popular research design in the entrepreneurship domain. For these studies, test-retest reliabilities of ρ > .70 or higher are an often-cited reliability criterion. Despite their widespread use, however, there is little rigorous analysis of whether test-retest reliability in metric conjoint studies relates to model efficacy. Informed by a systematic literature review, we conducted two Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the effects of various determinants of test-retest reliability in conjoint experiments. We then illustrate a workflow for entrepreneurship researchers employing conjoint designs to better evaluate—and communicate—confidence in statistical models estimated from conjoint data.","PeriodicalId":48443,"journal":{"name":"Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587231184071","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Metric conjoint studies are a popular research design in the entrepreneurship domain. For these studies, test-retest reliabilities of ρ > .70 or higher are an often-cited reliability criterion. Despite their widespread use, however, there is little rigorous analysis of whether test-retest reliability in metric conjoint studies relates to model efficacy. Informed by a systematic literature review, we conducted two Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the effects of various determinants of test-retest reliability in conjoint experiments. We then illustrate a workflow for entrepreneurship researchers employing conjoint designs to better evaluate—and communicate—confidence in statistical models estimated from conjoint data.
度量联合实验的重测信度:评估模型结果置信度的新工作流程
度量联合研究是创业领域一种流行的研究设计。对于这些研究,重新测试ρ >的信度。70或更高是一个经常被引用的可靠性标准。然而,尽管它们被广泛使用,但很少有严格的分析度量联合研究中测试-重测信度是否与模型有效性有关。通过系统的文献综述,我们进行了两次蒙特卡罗模拟,以评估联合实验中测试-重测可靠性的各种决定因素的影响。然后,我们说明了创业研究人员使用联合设计来更好地评估和交流从联合数据估计的统计模型的信心的工作流程。
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
19.00
自引率
12.40%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (ETP) is an interdisciplinary scholarly journal dedicated to conceptual and empirical research that advances, tests, or extends theory relating to entrepreneurship in its broadest sense. Article Topics: Topics covered in ETP include, but are not limited to: New Venture Creation, Development, Growth, and Performance Characteristics, Behaviors, and Types of Entrepreneurs Small Business Management Family-Owned Businesses Corporate, Social, and Sustainable Entrepreneurship National and International Studies of Enterprise Creation Research Methods in Entrepreneurship Venture Financing Content: The journal publishes articles that explore these topics through rigorous theoretical development, empirical analysis, and methodological innovation. ETP serves as a platform for advancing our understanding of entrepreneurship and its implications for individuals, organizations, and society.
×
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