Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Brusch, Daniel Baier, Antje Treppa (2002)
Conjoint Analysis and Stimulus Presentation — a Comparison of Alternative Methods
J.C. Huber, D.R. Wittink, J.A. Fiedler, R.L. Miller
An empirical comparison of ACA and full profile judgments
Madeleine Pullman, Kimberly Dodson, W. Moore (1999)
A Comparison of Conjoint Methods When There Are Many AttributesMarketing Letters, 10
V. Daems, F. Delvaux (1997)
Multivariate analysis of descriptive sensory data on 40 commercial beersFood Quality and Preference, 8
H. Schutz, D. Judge, J. Gentry (1986)
The importance of nutrition, brand, cost, and sensory attributes to food purchase and consumption
F. Carmone, P. Green, A. Jain (1978)
Robustness of Conjoint Analysis: Some Monté Carlo ResultsJournal of Marketing Research, 15
O. Ernst, H. Sattler
Validität multimedialer Conjoint‐Analysen, Ein empirischer Vergleich alternativer Produktpräsentationsformen
E. Rajh, T. Vranešević, D. Tolić
Tržišna vrijednost maraka u prehrambenoj industriji Republike Hrvatske
O. Toubia
Interior‐point methods applied to internet conjoint analysis
Ralph Allison, K. Uhl (1964)
Influence of Beer Brand Identification on Taste PerceptionJournal of Marketing Research, 1
R. Govindasamy, John Italia, Clare Liptak (1997)
Quality of Agricultural Produce: Consumer Preferences and Perceptions
T. Leigh, D. MacKay, John Summers (1984)
Reliability and Validity of Conjoint Analysis and Self-Explicated Weights: A ComparisonJournal of Marketing Research, 21
P. Green, Kristiaan Helsen (1989)
Cross-Validation Assessment of Alternatives to Individual-Level Conjoint Analysis: A Case StudyJournal of Marketing Research, 26
A. Strebinger, S. Hoffmann, G. Schweiger, T. Otter
Zur Realitätsnähe der Conjointanalyse
P. Green, A. Krieger, Y. Wind (2001)
Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and ProspectsInterfaces, 31
K. Backhaus, B. Erichson, W. Plinke, R. Weiber
Multivariate Analysemethoden. Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung
M. Vriens, G. Loosschilder, E. Rosbergen, D. Wittink (1998)
Verbal versus realistic pictorial representations in conjoint analysis with design attributesJournal of Product Innovation Management, 15
H. Sattler (1994)
Die Validität von Produkttests. Ein empirischer Vergleich zwischen hypothetischerund realer Produktpräsentation, 16
J. Carroll, P. Green (1995)
Guest Editorial: Psychometric Methods in Marketing Research: Part I, Conjoint AnalysisJournal of Marketing Research, 32
Rami Paasovaara, H. Luomala, Terhi Pohjanheimo, M. Sandell (2012)
Understanding consumers' brand-induced food taste perception: A comparison of ‘brand familiarity’ – and ‘consumer value – brand symbolism (in)congruity’ – accountsJournal of Consumer Behaviour, 11
J. Gil, Mercedes Sánchez (1997)
Consumer preferences for wine attributes: a conjoint approachBritish Food Journal, 99
M. Brusch, D. Baier (2002)
Realitätsnähere Produktpräsentation in der Marktforschung - Multimedia und Conjointanalyse
M. Holbrook, W. Moore (1981)
Feature Interactions in Consumer Judgments of Verbal Versus Pictorial PresentationsJournal of Consumer Research, 8
P. Bárcenas, R. Roman, F. Elortondo, M. Albisu (2001)
Consumer preference structures for traditional Spanish cheeses and their relationship with sensory propertiesFood Quality and Preference, 12
S. Hensel‐Börner, H. Sattler
Ein empirischer Validitätsvergleich zwischen der Customized Computerized Conjoint Analysis (CCC), der Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (ACA) und Self‐Explicated‐Verfahren
H. Cheng, A. Clarke, H. Heymann (1990)
INFLUENCE OF SELECTED MARKETING FACTORS ON CONSUMER RESPONSE TO RESTRUCTURED BEEF STEAKS: A CONJOINT ANALYSISJournal of Sensory Studies, 4
J. Carroll, Paul Green (1995)
Psychometric Methods in Marketing Research: Part I, Conjoint AnalysisJournal of Marketing Research, 32
J. Huber
Conjoint Analysis: How we got here and where we are
R. Likert
A technique for the measurement of attitudes
Ksenija Dumicic, Sanda Renko, Nataša Renko (2003)
A case study of the Croatian beer market structure and performancesBritish Food Journal, 105
S. Jaeger, D. Hedderley, H. Macfie (2001)
Methodological issues in conjoint analysis: a case studyEuropean Journal of Marketing, 35
B. Wansink
Measuring consumer response to food products: sensory tests that predict consumer acceptance
D.L. Roeber, J.A. Scanga, K.E. Belk, G.C. Smith
Consumer attitudes and preferences
W. Verbeke, R. Ward (2006)
Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: An application of ordered probit models to beef labelsFood Quality and Preference, 17
A. Krapp, H. Sattler
Rethinking preference measurement
ACNielsen
What's hot around the globe: insights on growth in food and beverages
E. Rajh, Tihomir Vranešević, D. Tolić (2003)
Croatian food industry - brand equity in selected product categoriesBritish Food Journal, 105
A. Strebinger, S. Hoffmann, G. Schweiger, T. Otter
Verbal versus pictorial stimuli in conjoint analysis: the moderating effect of involvement and hemisphericity
SPSS Inc.
SPSS Conjoint™ 8.0
S. Hensel-Börner, H. Sattler (2000)
Validity of Customized and Adaptive Hybrid Conjoint Analysis
J. Guinard, B. Uotani, P. Schlich (2001)
Internal and external mapping of preferences for commercial lager beers : comparison of hedonic ratings by consumers blind versus with knowledge of brand and priceFood Quality and Preference, 12
B. Wansink (2003)
Response to “Measuring consumer response to food products”. Sensory tests that predict consumer acceptanceFood Quality and Preference, 14
Z. Vickers (1993)
Incorporating Tasting into a conjoint Analysis of Taste, Health Claim, Price and brand for Purchasing Strawberry Yogurt.Journal of Sensory Studies, 8
K. Grunert (2002)
Current issues in the understanding of consumer food choiceTrends in Food Science and Technology, 13
S. Pettigrew (2002)
A grounded theory of beer consumption in AustraliaQualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 5
K. Roininen (2001)
Evaluation of food choice behavior : development and validation of health and taste attitude scales
A. Strebinger, S. Hoffmann, G. Schweiger, T. Otter (2000)
Zur Realitätsnähe der Conjointanalyse. Der Effekt von Präsentationsformat, lnvolvement und Hemisphärizität auf die subjektive Beurteilung der Aufgabe durch die Auskunftspersonen und die Vorhersagevalidität, 22
P. Green, V. Srinivasan (1990)
Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and PracticeJournal of Marketing, 54
K. Grunert, T. Bech-Larsen, L. Bredahl (2000)
Three issues in consumer quality perception and acceptance of dairy productsInternational Dairy Journal, 10
A. Arvola, L. Lähteenmäki, H. Tuorila (1999)
Predicting the Intent to Purchase Unfamiliar and Familiar Cheeses: The Effects of Attitudes, Expected Liking and Food NeophobiaAppetite, 32
H. Helgesen, R. Solheim, T. Næs (1998)
Consumer purchase probability of dry fermented lamb sausagesFood Quality and Preference, 9
P. Kotler, L.K. Keller
Marketing Management
D.K. Tscheulin
Ein empirischer Vergleich der Eignung von Conjoint‐Analyse und ‘Analytic Hierarchy Process’ (AHP) zur Neuproduktplanung
Purpose – The aims of this paper is to determine, via an empirical study of beer consumers in Croatia, the influence of tasting on the validity of conjoint analysis (CA) under presence of familiar or unfamiliar brands. Design/methodology/approach – The research comprised a face‐to‐face survey with 403 beer consumers. The respondents were divided into four groups regarding CA experiment (familiar/unfamiliar beer brand in combination with presence or absence of beer tasting). CA validity was measured with five criteria: face validity, convergent validity, internal validity, predictive validity and subjective evaluation of conjoint task. In addition to the CA experiment, a structured questionnaire was used consisting of a few questions regarding respondents' socio‐economic characteristics, beer purchasing, and consuming behaviour. Findings – The research results confirmed that tasting as an additional presentation method has significant influence on validity of CA. However, the results of the study indicate that tasting should be used as a stimulus presentation method for CA with food and beverage products/brands, which are unfamiliar to the consumers. When testing familiar brands and brands with established perceptions, simpler and less expensive verbal stimulus presentation can be used. Practical implications – According to the research results, it could be concluded that when performing CA with strong familiar brands, it is not necessary to use CA with tasting since tasting increases research complexity and costs and it does not achieve better results. However, tasting as a stimuli presentation method gives better results than pure verbal CA in the case of unfamiliar brands. Originality/value – The paper is one of the first to deal with tasting as a presentation method in conjoint analysis and its results have direct implications for the future use of CA with food and beverages.
British Food Journal – Emerald Publishing
Published: Jun 15, 2010
Keywords: Brand awareness; Food and drink products; Beer; Croatia; Sensory perception
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.