跳到内容ScholarGate
文库我的文库桌面Review Studio助手
登录
MaxDiff / Best-Worst Scaling/证据
方法证据记录

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

源记录

引文逐字复制自方法源记录。这些引文不代表任何层级的验证。

Maximum Difference Scaling (Best-Worst Scaling)
分类方法记录 · 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
打开完整方法

精选声明

声明已持久化到证据分类账中,每个声明都有自己的评估。

尚无精选声明

当分类账中没有声明时,此视图不会自行创建声明评估。

相关方法

从方法图中生成,显示为机器建议的关系 — 不推断任何证据声明。

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.

证据状态

Sources recorded, not reviewed

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

来源

从方法源记录复制的 3 条记录的引文。

操作

打开方法页面
ScholarGate

以内容为本的研究方法参考文库——每种方法是什么、如何运作、源自何处。

开放数据(CC-BY)

探索

  • 文库
  • 搜索方法…
  • 按领域浏览
  • 学科领域
  • 历程
  • 对比
  • 该用哪种方法?

参考

  • 学科
  • 图集
  • 术语表
  • 方法论
  • 哲学

工作区

  • 我的文库
  • 桌面
  • 聊天

公司

  • 关于
  • 价格
  • 联系我们
  • 建议新方法

本词条系根据已发表文献整理,仅供参考。核实任何信息的准确性及其是否适用于您的具体用途,仍由您自行负责。

© 2026 ScholarGate · 研究方法参考文库
  • 隐私
  • Cookie
  • 条款
  • 删除账户