This article presents a model of consumer choice behavior and illustrates the effective ness of the model through decisions made about a restaurant meal. Management and marketing implications are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Akaah, I. and P.K. Korgaonkar (1983), "An Empirical Comparison of the Predictive Validity of Self-Explicated Huber-Hybrid, Traditional Conjoint, and Hybrid Conjoint Models," Journal of Marketing Research20, 187-197.
2.
Banks, S. (1965), Experimentation in Marketing, New York: McGraw-Hill.
3.
Beckwith, E. and R. Lehmann (1973), "The Importance of Differential Weights in Multiple Attribute Models of Consumer Attitude," Journal of Marketing Research10, 141-145.
4.
Belk, R.W. (1974), "An Exploratory Assessment of Situational Effects in Buyer Behavior," Journal of Marketing Research11, 156-163.
5.
—( 1975), "Situational Variables and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research2, 154-164.
6.
Berry, L.L. (1980), "Services Marketing Is Different," Business (May-June), 25-26.
7.
Bettman, J.R., N. Capon, and R. Lutz (1975), "Multiattribute Measurement Models and Multiattribute Theory: A Test of Construct Validity," Journal of Consumer Research1, 1-15.
8.
Cadwallader, M. (1981), "Towards a Cognitive Gravity Model: The Case of Consumer Spatial Behavior," Regional Studies15, 274-284.
9.
Calantone, R.J. and J.S. Johar ( 1984), "Seasonable Segmentation of the Tourism Market Using a Benefit Segmentation Framework," Journal of Travel Research23, 14-24.
10.
Cattin, P. and D.R. Wittink (1982), "Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis: A Survey ," Journal of Marketing46, 44-53.
11.
Cohen, J. (1968), "Multiple Regression as a General Data-Analytic System," Psychological Bulletin70, 426-443.
12.
Cosper, R. and B.L. Kinsley (1984), "An Application of Conjoint Analysis to Leisure Research: Cultural Preferences in Canada," Journal of Leisure Research16, 224-233.
13.
Degen, J.M. (1980), "Segmentation Strategies for the 80s," Restaurant Business (October), 248-254.
14.
Fisk, R.P. (1981), "Toward a Consumption/Evaluation Process Model for Services," in Marketing of Services, eds. J. H. Donnelly and W. R. George, Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 191-195.
15.
Green, P.E. and P.J. Carmone (1969), "Multidimensional Scaling: An Introduction and Comparison of Nonmetric Unfolding Techniques," Journal of Marketing Research6, 330-341.
16.
Green, P.E. and M.T. Devita (1973), "An Interaction Model of Consumer Utility," Journal of Consumer Research2, 146-153.
17.
Green, P.E. and V.R. Rao (1971), "Conjoint Measurement of Quantifying Judgement Data," Journal of Marketing Research8, 355-365.
18.
Green, P.E. and V. Srinivasan (1978), "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research5, 103-123.
19.
Green, P.E. and Y. Wind (1975), "New Way to Measure Consumer Judgements," Harvard Business Review53 (July-August), 107-117.
20.
Johnson, R. (1972), "Pairwise Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling," Psychometrika38, 313-322.
21.
—( 1973), Trade-Off Analysis: A Method for Quantifying Consumer Values, Toronto: Market Facts.
22.
—( 1974), "Trade-Off Analysis of Consumer Values," Journal of Marketing Research11, 251-263.
23.
Kakkar, P. and R.J. Lutz (1975), "Toward a Taxonomy of Consumption Situations," in Combined Proceedings, Series 37, ed. E. M. Maze, Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 206-210.
24.
Kruskal, J.B. (1965), "Analysis of Factorial Experiments by Estimating Monotone Transformations of the Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B-27, 251-263.
25.
Krantz, D.H. (1964), "Conjoint Measurement: The Luce-Tukey Axiomatization and Some Extensions," Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1,248-277.
26.
Levitt, T. (1980), "Marketing Success Through Differentiation - Of Anything," Harvard Business Review (January-February), 83-91.
27.
Luce, R.D. and W.J. Tukey (1964), "Simultaneous Conjoint Measurement: A New Type of Fundamental Measurement," Journal of Mathematical Psychology1, 1-27.
28.
Lutz, R.J. and P. Kakkar (1975), "The Psychological Situation as a Determinant of Consumer Demand," inAdvances in Consumer Research, vol. 2, ed. M. J. Schlinger , Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 439-453.
29.
Mazis, M.B., O.T. Athola, and P.E. Klippel ( 1975), "A Comparison ofFour Multi-Attribute Models in the Prediction of Consumer Attitudes," Journal of Consumer Research2, 38-52.
30.
Miller, K.E. and J.L. Ginter (1979), "An Investigation of Situation Variables in Brand Choice Behavior and Attitude," Journal of Marketing Research16, 111-123.
31.
Ontario Research Council on Leisure (1976), The Canadian Outdoor Recreation Demand Study, Vol. II: The Technical Notes, Toronto: Ontario Research Council of Leisure.
32.
Rice, G.R. (1980), "The Science of Market Segmentation and Positioning ," Restaurant Business (May), 226-230.
33.
Srivastava, R.K. (1980), "Usage-Situational Influences on Perceptions of Product Markets: Response Homogeneity and Its Implications for Consumer Research ," in Advances in Consumer Research, vol 7, ed. J. C. Olson, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 644-649.
34.
Statistics Canada (1982), Market Research Handbook, Ottawa: Department of Supplies and Services.
35.
Timmermans, H. and R. van den Heijden (1984), "The Predictive Ability of Alternative Decision Rules in Decompositional Multiattribute Preference Models," Sistemi Urbani1, 89-101.
36.
Tversky, A. (1967), "A General Theory of Polynomial Conjoint Measurements ," Journal of Mathematical Psychology4, 1-20.
37.
Warshaw, P.R. (1980), "Predicting Purchase and Other Behaviors from General and Contextually Specific Intentions," Journal of Marketing Research17, 26-33.
38.
Wyckham, R.G., P.T. Fitzroy, and G.D. Mandry (1975), "Marketing of Services: An Evaluation of Theory ," European Journal of Marketing9, 69-77.
39.
Young, F.W. (1969), Polynomial ConjointAnalysis of Similarities: Definitions for a Special Algorithm Research Paper 76, Chapel Hill, NC: Psychometric Laboratory, University of North Carolina .
