Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Brinkman (2006)
Proeven van Succes. Sensorisch Onderzoek: Technieken, Procedures en Toepassingen
Philippe Cattin, D. Wittink (1982)
Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis: A SurveyJournal of Marketing, 46
A. Tomarken, R. Serlin (1986)
QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN PSYCHOLOGY Comparison of ANOVA Alternatives Under Variance Heterogeneity and Specific Noncentrality Structures
(1927)
: A law of comparative judgement
Richard Johnson (2005)
A Career between Theory and PracticeJournal of Marketing Research, 42
M. Bech, D. Gyrd-Hansen, T. Kjaer, J. Lauridsen, J. Sørensen (2007)
Graded pairs comparison - does strength of preference matter? Analysis of preferences for specialised nurse home visits for pain management.Health economics, 16 5
P. Green, V. Srinivasan (1978)
Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and OutlookJournal of Consumer Research, 5
J. Hauser, G. Urban (1977)
A Normative Methodology for Modeling Consumer Response to InnovationOper. Res., 25
H. Baumgartner, J. Steenkamp (2001)
Response Styles in Marketing Research: A Cross-National InvestigationJournal of Marketing Research, 38
(1958)
Theory and Method of Scaling
Cross - cultural / national usage of constant sum scales
T. Johnson, P. Kulesa, Y. Cho, S. Shavitt (2005)
The Relation Between Culture and Response StylesJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36
(1981)
Acquiescence, extreme response bias and culture: a multilevel analysis
P.E. Green, A.M. Krieger, T.G. Vavra (1997)
Evaluating new products: conjoint analysis offers a level of detail that few concept testing methods can matchMark. Res., 9
R. Helm, A. Scholl, Laura Manthey, M. Steiner (2004)
Measuring customer preferences in new product development: comparing compositional and decompositional methodsInternational Journal of Product Development, 1
G. Hooley, N. Piercy, B. Nicoulaud (1993)
Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning
(1978)
Evaluating new products: conjoint analysis offers a level
(2009)
Verhallen, T.M.M.: Response styles in rating scales: evidence of method bias
H. Baumgartner, J.-B.E.M. Steenkamp (2006)
The Handbook of Marketing Research: Uses, Misuses, and Future Advances
R. Day (1968)
Preference Tests and the Management of Product FeaturesJournal of Marketing, 32
P.B. Smith, R. Fischer (2008)
Individuals and Cultures in Multilevel Analysis
Michael Rich (1998)
Marketing Engineering: : Computer‐Assisted Marketing Analysis and PlanningJournal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 13
R. Danielis, E. Marcucci, Lucia Rotaris (2005)
Logistics managers’ stated preferences for freight service attributesTransportation Research Part E-logistics and Transportation Review, 41
O. Netzer, V. Srinivasan (2007)
Adaptive Self-Explication of Multi-Attribute PreferencesBehavioral Marketing
Y. Wind, J. Denny, Arthur Cunningham (1979)
A Comparison of Three Brand Evaluation ProceduresPublic Opinion Quarterly, 43
Stanford Odesky (1967)
Handling the Neutral Vote in Paired Comparison Product TestingJournal of Marketing Research, 4
T.P. Johnson, P. Kulesa, Y.I. Cho, S. Shavitt (2005)
The relation between culture and response styles: evidence from 19 countriesJ. Cross-Cult. Psychol., 36
T.K. Van Dijk, F. Datema, A.-L.J.H.F. Piggen, S.C.M. Welten, F.J.R. Van De Vijver (2009)
Quod Erat Demonstrandum: From Herodotus’ Ethnographic Journeys to Cross-Cultural Research
R. Day (1965)
Systematic Paired Comparisons in Preference AnalysisJournal of Marketing Research, 2
Gordon Cheung, Roger Rensvold (2000)
Assessing Extreme and Acquiescence Response Sets in Cross-Cultural Research Using Structural Equations ModelingJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31
R. Rosenberger, G. Peterson, J. Loomis (2002)
Applying a Method of Paired Comparisons to Measure Economic Values for Multiple Goods SetsJournal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 34
Tammo Bijmolt, M. Wedel (1995)
The effects of alternative methods of collecting similarity data for Multidimensional ScalingInternational Journal of Research in Marketing, 12
P. Moran (1947)
On the method of paired comparisons.Biometrika, 34 Pt 3-4
D. Peryam, F. Pilgrim (1957)
Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences.Food Technology
Martijn Jong, J. Steenkamp, J. Fox, H. Baumgartner (2008)
Using Item Response Theory to Measure Extreme Response Style in Marketing Research: A Global InvestigationJournal of Marketing Research, 45
H. Gulliksen (1956)
A least squares solution for paired comparisons with incomplete dataPsychometrika, 21
M. O'Mahony, S. Masuoka, R. Ishii (1994)
A THEORETICAL NOTE ON DIFFERENCE TESTS: MODELS, PARADOXES AND COGNITIVE STRATEGIESJournal of Sensory Studies, 9
G. Gabrielsen (2001)
A multi-level model for preferencesFood Quality and Preference, 12
R. Davidson, Pater Farquhar (1973)
A Bibliography on the Method of Paired Comparisons
N. Hanley, S. Mourato, R. Wright (2002)
Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation?Journal of Economic Surveys, 15
A. Greenberg, S. Collins (1966)
Paired Comparison Taste Tests: Some Food for ThoughtJournal of Marketing Research, 3
D. Paulhus (1991)
Measurement and control of response bias.
L. Yeh, Kwang-Ok Kim, P. Chompreeda, H. Rimkeeree, N. Yau, D. Lundahl (1998)
Comparison in Use of the 9-Point Hedonic Scale between Americans, Chinese, Koreans, and ThaiFood Quality and Preference, 9
H. Baumgartner, J. Steenkamp (2006)
Response Biases in Marketing Research
R. Bradley, M. Terry (1952)
RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNSBiometrika
F. Johnson, W. Desvousges (1997)
Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Data: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy ProgramsJournal of Environmental Economics and Management, 34
A.J. Tomarken, R.C. Serlin (1986)
Comparison of ANOVA alternatives under variance heterogeneity and specific noncentrality structuresPsychol. Bull., 99
R. Bradley, M. Terry (1952)
RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNS THE METHOD OF PAIRED COMPARISONSBiometrika, 39
R. Bengston, H. Brenner (1964)
Product Test Results Using Three Different MethodologiesJournal of Marketing Research, 1
S.S. Schiffman, M.L. Reynolds, F.W. Young (1981)
Introduction to Multidimensional Scaling: Theory, Methods and Applications
H. Herk, Y. Poortinga, T. Verhallen (2004)
Response styles in rating scales : Evidence of method bias in data from 6 EU countries
T. Dijk, F. Datema, A-L. Piggen, Stephanie Welten, F. Vijver (2009)
Acquiescence and Extremity in Cross-National Surveys: Domain Dependence and Country-Level Correlates
M. Burton (2003)
Too Many Questions? The Uses of Incomplete Cyclic Designs for Paired ComparisonsField Methods, 15
A. Beuckelaer (1996)
A closer examination on some parametric alternatives to the ANOVA F-testStatistical Papers, 37
P. Games, H. Keselman, Joanne Rogan (1981)
Simultaneous pairwise multiple comparison procedures for means when sample sizes are unequal.Psychological Bulletin, 90
S.M. Smith, G.S. Albaum (2004)
Fundamentals of Marketing Research
A. Agresti (1992)
Analysis of Ordinal Paired Comparison DataApplied statistics, 41
A. Greenberg (1963)
Paired comparisons versus monadic testsJ. Advert. Res., 3
H.A. David (1988)
The Method of Paired Comparisons
J. Kampen (2007)
The Impact of Survey Methodology and Context on Central Tendency, Nonresponse and Associations of Subjective Indicators of Government PerformanceQuality & Quantity, 41
P. Courcoux, M. Séménou (1997)
Preference data analysis using a paired comparison modelFood Quality and Preference, 8
M. Viswanathan, S. Sudman, Michael Johnson (2004)
Maximum versus Meaningful Discrimination in Scale Response: Implications for Validity of Measurement of Consumer Perceptions about ProductsJournal of Business Research, 57
C. Ofir (2004)
Reexamining Latitude of Price Acceptability and Price Thresholds: Predicting Basic Consumer Reaction to PriceJournal of Consumer Research, 30
Sunho Jung (2003)
Multidimensional ScalingTechnometrics, 45
The popular use of graded paired comparisons in empirical studies assessing consumers’ preferences, and the potential effect of cross-national differences in (extreme) response styles on the quality of graded paired comparison data, supply ample reasons for an empirical verification of the cross-national validity of such scales. Using data from a cross-national margarine brand study including fourteen different nations (N = 4,560), we found sufficient statistical evidence for cross-national bias due to existing cross-national differences in extreme responses. However, the low values reported for effect size measures (intra-class correlation coefficient, R 2 value) indicated that the impact of the cross-national bias is marginal. The findings from our study provided empirical support for the hypothesis that graded paired comparison data can be meaningfully compared across nations.
Quality & Quantity – Springer Journals
Published: Aug 27, 2011
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.