Proponents of numerical conjoint measurement gen erally assume that the technique's goodness-of-fit mea sure will detect an inappropriate composition rule or the presence of random response error. In this paper a number of hypothetical and real preference rank order ings are analyzed using both axiomatic conjoint mea surement and numerical conjoint measurement to dem onstrate that this assumption is not warranted and may result in a distorted scaling.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, N.H., & Shanteau, J.C. (1977). Weak inference with linear models. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 1155-1170.
2.
Birnbaum, M.H. (1973). The devil rides again: Correlation as an index of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 79, 239-242.
3.
Busemeyer, J.R. (1980). Importance of measurement theory, error theory, and experimental design for testing the significance of interactions. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 237-244.
4.
Carmone, F.J., Green, P.E., & Jain, A.K. (1978). Robustness of conjoint analysis: Some Monte Carlo results. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 300-303.
5.
Carroll, J.D. (1973). Appendix B.: Models and algorithms for multidimensional scaling, conjoint measurement, and related techniques. In P. E. Green & Y. Wind , Multiattribute decisions in marketing: A measurement approach (pp. 299-371). Hinsdale IL: Dryden Press.
6.
Coombs, C.H., & Bowen, J.N. (1971). A test of VEtheories of risk and the effect of the central limit theorem. Acta Psychologica, 35, 15-28.
7.
Coombs, C.H., Coombs, L.C., & McClelland, G.H. (1975). Preference scales for number and sex of children. Population Studies, 29, 273-298.
8.
Coombs, C.H., Dawes, R.M., & Tversky, A. (1970). Mathematical psychology: An elementary introduction . Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.
9.
Coombs, C.H., & Huang, L.C. (1970). Polynomial psychophysics of risk. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 7, 317-338.
10.
Dawes, R.M., & Corrigan, B. (1974). Linear models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 95-106.
11.
de Leeuw, J., Young, F.W., & Takane, Y. (1976). Additive structure in qualitative data: An alternating least squares method with optimal scaling features. Psychometrika , 41, 471-503.
12.
Einhorn, H.J. (1970). The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 73, 221-230.
13.
Emery, D.R. (1978). Optimal scaling via ordinary least squares (Working Paper No. WP-31-78. Alberta, Canada: University of Calgary, Faculty of Business.
14.
Emery, D.R., & Barron, F.H. (1979). Axiomatic and numerical conjoint measurement: An evaluation of diagnostic efficacy. Psychometrika, 44, 195-210.
15.
Fischer, G.W. (1976). Multidimensional utility models for risky and riskless choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 17, 127-146.
16.
Green, P.E., Carmone, F.J., & Wind, Y. (1972). Subjective evaluation models and conjoint measurement . Behavioral Science, 17, 288-299.
17.
Green, P.E., & Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research , 5, 103-123.
18.
Green, P.E., & Wind, Y. (1973). Multiattribute decisions in marketing; A measurement approach. Hinsdale IL: Dryden Press .
19.
Hurvich, L.M., & Jameson, D. (1955). Some quantitative aspects of an opponent-colors theory: II. Brightness, saturation, and hue in normal and dichromatic vision . Journal of the Optical Society of America, 45, 602-616.
20.
Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement (Vol. 1). New York: Academic Press.
21.
Krantz, D.H., & Tversky, A. (1971). Conjoint-measurement analysis of composition rules in psychology. Psychological Review, 78, 151-169.
22.
Kruskal, J.B. (1965). Analysis of factorial experiments by estimating monotone transformations of the data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 27B, 251-263.
23.
Lehner, P., & Noma, E. (1980). A new solution to the problem of finding all numerical solutions to ordered metric structures. Psychometrika, 45, 135-138.
24.
McClelland, G.H., & Coombs, C.H. (1975). ORD-MET : A general algorithm for constructing all numerical solutions to ordered metric structures. Psychometrika , 40, 269-290.
25.
Nickerson, C.A., McClelland, G.H., & Kegeles, S.M. (1981). A decision-making approach to contraceptive choice (Report No. 234. Boulder CO: University of Colorado, Center for Research on Judgment and Policy.
26.
Nygren, T.E. (1980). Limitations of additive conjoint scaling procedures: Detecting nonadditivity when additivity is known to be violated. Applied Psychological Measurement, 4, 367-383.
27.
Roskam, E.E. (1974). Unidimensional conjoint measurement (UNICON) for multi-faceted designs. The Netherlands: University of Nijmegen, Psychologisch Laboratorium.
28.
Shanteau, J.C. (1977). Correlation as a deceiving measure of fit. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 10, 134-136.
29.
Spence, K.W. (1956). Behavior theory and conditioning. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.
30.
Srinivasan, V., & Shocker, A.D. (1973). Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences. Psychometrika, 38, 337-369.
31.
Takane, Y. (1978). A maximum likelihood method for nonmetric multidimensional scaling: I. The case in which all empirical pairwise orderings are independent—Theory . Japanese Psychological Research, 20, 7-17.
32.
Timmermans, H. (1980). Unidimensional conjoint measurement models and consumer decision-making. Area (Publication of the Institute of British Geographers), 12, 291-300.
33.
Ullrich, J.R., Cummins, D.E., & Walkenbach, J. (1978). PCJM2: A program for the axiomatic conjoint measurement analysis of polynomial composition rules. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 10, 89-90.
34.
Ullrich, J.R., & Painter, J.R. (1974). A conjoint-measurement analysis of human judgment . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 12, 50-61.
35.
Wallsten, T.S. (1972). Conjoint-measurement framework for the study of probabilistic information processing. Psychological Review , 79, 245-260.
36.
Yntema, D.B., & Torgerson, W.S. (1961). Man-computer cooperation in decisions requiring common sense. IRE Transactions of the Professional Group on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-2(1), 20-26.
37.
Young, F.W. (1972). A model for polynomial conjoint analysis algorithms . In R. N. Shepard, A. K., Romney, & S. B. Nerlove (Eds.), Multidimensional scaling : Theory and applications in the behavioral sciences (Vol. 1). New York : Academic Press.
38.
Zeleny, M. (1976). On the inadequacy of the regression paradigm used in the study of human judgment. Theory and Decision, 7, 57-65.
