Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
MaxDiff / Best-Worst Scaling/Evidence
Method evidence record

MaxDiff / Best-Worst Scaling

MaxDiff, also known as best-worst scaling (BWS), measures the relative importance or preference of a set of items by repeatedly asking respondents to identify the best (most important or most preferred) and worst (least) item within small subsets. Introduced by Jordan Louviere and formalized by Marley and Louviere's 2005 probabilistic models, the method exploits the fact that people are far better at picking extremes than at rating many items on a scale. Each best-worst judgment reveals the maximum-difference pair in a set, and across many balanced subsets the choices pin down a single interval scale of item utilities. Because every respondent is forced to make trade-offs, MaxDiff sidesteps the scale-use bias and lack of discrimination that plague rating grids, where respondents often call everything important. Item scores can be computed by simple best-minus-worst counts or, more rigorously, by fitting a multinomial logit choice model, with hierarchical Bayes yielding individual-level, probability-scaled importances. The result is a clear, discriminating ranking of items that supports prioritization, segmentation, and feature selection.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

Maximum Difference Scaling (Best-Worst Scaling)
Taxonomic method record · regression-model / marketing-research
  • Louviere, J. J., Flynn, T. N., & Marley, A. A. J. (2015). Best-Worst Scaling: Theory, Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. · DOI 10.1017/CBO9781107337855
  • Marley, A. A. J., & Louviere, J. J. (2005). Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best-worst choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49(6), 464-480. · DOI 10.1016/j.jmp.2005.05.003
  • Orme, B. K. (2020). Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research (4th ed.). Madison, WI: Research Publishers LLC. · ISBN 9780972729772
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Often confused withAdaptive Conjoint Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyChoice-Based Conjointmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Often confused withConjoint Market Simulatormachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyDiscrete Choice Experimentmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

3 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account