Du fait de son caractère multidimensionnel, la qualité des produits est difficile à évaluer. Les associations de consommateurs tentent de guider le choix des particuliers en leur proposant un indicateur global de qualité. Cet indicateur, reposant sur un système de pondérations choisi a priori, peut paraître arbitraire. La méthode DEA, en autorisant la flexibilité des pondérations semble plus objective.
AliA.I.SeifordL.M. (1993), The Mathematical Programming Approach to Efficiency Analysis, The measurement of productive efficiency, Techniques and Applications, éd. HaroldO.FriedC.A.LovellKnoxSchmidtShelton S., Oxford University Press, 120–159.
2.
ArchibaldR.B.HaulmanC.A.MoodyC.E. (1983), Quality, Price, Advertising, and Published Quality Ratings, Journal of Consumer Research, 9, mars, 347–356.
3.
CharnesA. (1994), Data Envelopment Analysis. Theory, Methodology, and Application, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
4.
CharnesA.CooperW.W.RhodesE. (1978), Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units, European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.
5.
CorreM-F.GeaiJ.-P. (1996), Test Lave-vaisselle, Que Choisir, 328, 20–25.
6.
CubbinJ.S.MurfinA.J. (1987), Regression Analysis versus Linear Programming in the Analysis of Price-Quality Relationships : An Application to the Determination of Market Shares, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 49, 4, 385–398.
7.
CurryD.J.FauldsD.J. (1986), Indexing Product Quality : Issues, Theory, and Results, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, Juin, 134–145.
8.
DoyleJ.GreenR. (1991), Comparing Products Using Data Envelopment Analysis, OMEGA, 19, 6, 631–638.
9.
DoyleJ.GreenR. (1994a), Efficiency and Cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, Meanings and Uses, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45, 5, 567–578.
10.
DoyleJ.GreenR. (1994b), Strategic Choice and Data Envelopment Analysis : Comparing Computers Across Many Attributes, Journal of Information Technology, 9, 61–69.
11.
DysonR.G.ThanassoulisE. (1988), Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 39, 6, 563–576.
12.
FarteliM.J. (1957), The measurement of productive efficiency, Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 120, 253–281.
13.
GerstnerE. (1985), Do Higher Prices Signal Higher Quality, Journal of Marketing Research, 22, mai, 209–215.
14.
GrossmanS.J.StiglitzJ.E. (1976), Information and Competitive Price Systems, American Economic Association, 66, mai, 246–253.
15.
KamakuraW.A.RatchfordB.T.AgrawalJ. (1988), Measuring Market Efficiency and Welfare Loss, Journal of Consumer Research, 15, décembre.
16.
LancasterK. (1966), New Approach to Consumer Theory, Journal of Political Economy, 74, avril, 132–157.
17.
LiénardP. (1974), Décibels et Indices de bruit, Paris, éd. GalfMassonCie.
18.
LovellC.A.K.PastorJ.T. (1995), Units invariant and translation invariant DEA models, Operations Research Letters, 18, 147–151.
19.
NelsonD. (1970), Information and Consumer Behavior, Journal of Political Economy, 78, mars-avril, 311–329.
20.
NormanM.StokerB. (1991), Data Envelopment Analysis, The Assessment of Performance, John Wiley & Sons.
21.
RatchfordB.T.GuptaP. (1992), On Estimating Market Efficiency, Journal of Consumer Policy, 15, 275–293.
22.
SprolesG.B. (1986), The Concept of Quality and the Efficiency of Markets : Issues and Comments, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, juin, 146–148.
