A Comparison of Criteria to Design Efficient Choice Experiments

To date, no attempt has been made to design efficient choice experiments by means of the G- and V-optimality criteria. These criteria are known to make precise response predictions, which is exactly what choice experiments aim to do. In this article, the authors elaborate on the G- and V-optimality criteria for the multinomial logit model and compare their prediction performances with those of the D- and A-optimality criteria. They make use of Bayesian design methods that integrate the optimality criteria over a prior distribution of likely parameter values. They employ a modified Fedorov algorithm to generate the optimal choice designs. They also discuss other aspects of the designs, such as level overlap, utility balance, estimation performance, and computational effectiveness.

[1]  Heinz Holling,et al.  Advances in optimum experimental design for conjoint analysis and discrete choice models , 2002 .

[2]  Warren F. Kuhfeld,et al.  Large Factorial Designs for Product Engineering and Marketing Research Applications , 2005, Technometrics.

[3]  Michel Wedel,et al.  Profile Construction in Experimental Choice Designs for Mixed Logit Models , 2002 .

[4]  James B. Wiley,et al.  Efficient choice set designs for estimating availability cross-effects models , 1992 .

[5]  Linda M. Haines,et al.  14 Designs for nonlinear and generalized linear models , 1996, Design and analysis of experiments.

[6]  M. Wedel,et al.  Designing Conjoint Choice Experiments Using Managers' Prior Beliefs , 2001 .

[7]  Peter Martinsson,et al.  Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics. , 2003, Health economics.

[8]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Design and Analysis of Simulated Consumer Choice or Allocation Experiments: An Approach Based on Aggregate Data , 1983 .

[9]  David S. Bunch,et al.  OPTIMAL DESIGNS FOR 2 k PAIRED COMPARISON EXPERIMENTS , 2001 .

[10]  R. K. Meyer,et al.  The Coordinate-Exchange Algorithm for Constructing Exact Optimal Experimental Designs , 1995 .

[11]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  A Comparison of Experimental Design Strategies for Multinomial Logit Models : The Case of Generic Attributes , 2001 .

[12]  Deborah J. Street,et al.  Optimal designs for choice experiments with asymmetric attributes , 2005 .

[13]  Deborah J. Street,et al.  Optimal Designs for 2 k Choice Experiments , 2003 .

[14]  Weiming Ke,et al.  The Optimal Design of Blocked and Split-Plot Experiments , 2005, Technometrics.

[15]  Steven G. Gilmour,et al.  An algorithm for arranging response surface designs in small blocks , 2000 .

[16]  D. Street,et al.  Optimal and near-optimal pairs for the estimation of effects in 2-level choice experiments , 2004 .

[17]  J. Swait,et al.  The Influence of Task Complexity on Consumer Choice: A Latent Class Model of Decision Strategy Switching , 2001 .

[18]  W. J. Studden,et al.  Theory Of Optimal Experiments , 1972 .

[19]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[20]  R. D. Cook,et al.  A Comparison of Algorithms for Constructing Exact D-Optimal Designs , 1980 .

[21]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Experimental analysis of choice , 1991 .

[22]  Joel Huber,et al.  Improving Parameter Estimates and Model Prediction by Aggregate Customization in Choice Experiments , 2001 .

[23]  W. Näther.  Optimum experimental designs , 1994 .

[24]  Joel Huber,et al.  A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[25]  Anthony C. Atkinson,et al.  Optimum Experimental Designs , 1992 .

[26]  Joel Huber,et al.  The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[27]  K. Chaloner,et al.  Bayesian Experimental Design: A Review , 1995 .

[28]  Donald A. Anderson,et al.  Designs of Discrete Choice Set Experiments for Estimating Both Attribute and Availability Cross Effects , 1994 .