Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
Adaptive Conjoint Analysis/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

Adaptive Conjoint Analysis

Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (ACA) is a hybrid, computer-administered conjoint method that builds each respondent's part-worth utilities by combining a self-explicated priors stage with a sequence of adaptively chosen paired-comparison trade-offs. Developed by Richard Johnson at Sawtooth Software in the mid-1980s, ACA was designed to handle many more attributes than a respondent could realistically evaluate in full-profile or choice tasks. The interview first asks people to rate the desirability of attribute levels and the importance of attributes, then uses those answers to generate paired product comparisons that are roughly balanced in utility, which are the most informative trade-offs. Respondents indicate graded preference between each pair, and the program updates the utilities in real time, focusing later questions where uncertainty is greatest. Green, Krieger, and Agarwal's 1991 evaluation in the Journal of Marketing Research documented both ACA's strengths and important caveats about its self-explicated component and attribute-importance estimates. ACA produces individual-level utilities that can drive purchase-likelihood calibration and market simulation.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Adaptive Conjoint Analysis (ACA)
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / marketing-research
  • Green, P. E., Krieger, A. M., & Agarwal, M. K. (1991). Adaptive Conjoint Analysis: Some Caveats and Suggestions. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(2), 215-222. · DOI 10.1177/002224379102800208
  • 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
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Often confused withChoice-Based Conjointmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyConjoint Market Simulatormachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Used in the same domainDiscrete Choice Experimentmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Often confused withMaxDiff / Best-Worst Scalingmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

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

Kilder

2 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto