An Integrated Model of Discrete Choice and Response Time with Application to Conjoint Analysis

Computer and Web-based interviewing tools have made response times ubiquitous in marketing research. Practitioners use these data as an indicator of data quality, and academics use them as an indicator of latent processes related to memory, attributes, and decision making. The authors investigate a Poisson race model with choice and response times as dependent variables. The model facilitates inference about respondents' preferences for choice alternatives, their diligence in providing responses, and the accessibility of attitudes and the speed of thinking. Thus, the model distinguishes between respondents who are quick to think and those who are quick to react but do so without much thought. Empirically, the authors find support for the endogenous nature of response times and demonstrate that models that treat response times as exogenous variables may result in misleading inferences.

[1]  Antonio G. Chessa,et al.  A Neurocognitive Model of Advertisement Content and Brand Name Recall , 2007 .

[2]  Diederich,et al.  Dynamic Stochastic Models for Decision Making under Time Constraints , 1997, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[3]  David C. Schmittlein,et al.  Counting Your Customers: Who-Are They and What Will They Do Next? , 1987 .

[4]  C SchmittleinDavid,et al.  Counting Your Customers , 1987 .

[5]  A. W. Kemp,et al.  Univariate Discrete Distributions , 1993 .

[6]  John R Anderson,et al.  An integrated theory of the mind. , 2004, Psychological review.

[7]  Michael A. Olson,et al.  Implicit measures in social cognition. research: their meaning and use. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[8]  J. Busemeyer.  Decision making under uncertainty: a comparison of simple scalability, fixed-sample, and sequential-sampling models. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[9]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. , 2001, Psychological review.

[10]  N. Klein,et al.  Context Effects on Effort and Accuracy in Choice: An Enquiry into Adaptive Decision Making , 1989 .

[11]  T. Zandt,et al.  Time-dependent Poisson counter models of response latency in simple judgment. , 2000, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[12]  C. Chatfield,et al.  Results concerning Brand Choice , 1975 .

[13]  Timothy B. Heath,et al.  Conflict and Loss Aversion in Multiattribute Choice: The Effects of Trade-Off Size and Reference Dependence on Decision Difficulty☆ , 1996 .

[14]  R. Marois,et al.  Capacity limits of information processing in the brain , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  J. Townsend,et al.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. , 1993, Psychological review.

[16]  M. Newton.  Approximate Bayesian-inference With the Weighted Likelihood Bootstrap , 1994 .

[17]  A. Taudes,et al.  A Multivariate Polya Model of Brand Choice and Purchase Incidence , 1986 .

[18]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1985 .

[19]  Hal S. Stern,et al.  A continuum of paired comparisons models , 1990 .

[20]  Richard P. Bagozzi,et al.  On Using Response Latency to Measure Preference , 1980 .

[21]  A. Arkoff.  Resolution of approach-approach and avoidance-avoidance conflicts. , 1957, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[22]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[23]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. , 2001, Psychological review.

[24]  Eric T. Bradlow,et al.  An Integrated Model for Whether, Who, When, and How Much in Internet Auctions , 2005 .

[25]  R. Ditrichs,et al.  The effect of an undecided alternative on resolution of approach-approach and avoidance-avoidance conflict situations , 1968 .

[26]  Manoj Hastak,et al.  Memory-based Product Judgments: Effects of Involvement at Encoding and Retrieval , 1994 .

[27]  Ambar G. Rao,et al.  Transition Times: Distributions Arising from Time Heterogeneous Poisson Processes , 1995 .

[28]  J. Townsend,et al.  Fundamental derivations from decision field theory , 1992 .

[29]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[30]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Thurstone's discriminal processes fifty years later , 1977 .

[31]  Eric T. Bradlow,et al.  An Integrated Model for Bidding Behavior in Internet Auctions: Whether, Who, When, and how Much , 2005 .

[32]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  Decision making under time pressure: An independent test of sequential sampling models , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[33]  Youjae Yi.  The Effects of Contextual Priming in Print Advertisements , 1990 .

[34]  James Maclachlan,et al.  Implementation of Response Latency Measures , 1979 .

[35]  T. Tyebjee.  Response Time, Conflict, and Involvement in Brand Choice , 1979 .

[36]  Michel Wedel,et al.  Response Latencies in the Analysis of Conjoint Choice Experiments , 2000 .

[37]  Young-Hoon Park,et al.  Bayesian Estimation of Bid Sequences in Internet Auctions Using a Generalized Record Breaking Model , 2007 .

[38]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[39]  P. Herr.  Priming Price: Prior Knowledge and Context Effects , 1989 .

[40]  J. Davis.  Univariate Discrete Distributions , 2006 .