Abstract
This paper applies a structural equation methodology (LISREL) to the evaluation of the results obtained from conjoint measurement. Contrary to previous work, the results indicated that stress, sign, and prediction give consistent evaluations of the results of conjoint measurement. The solution given by the LISREL analysis was criticized; however, following a Spearman factor analysis, the same conclusion was drawn: stress, sign, and prediction appear to be measuring the same construct.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Acito Franklin and Arun Jain, “Evaluation of Conjoint Analysis Results: A Comparison of Methods,” Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (February 1980), 106–12.
Richard P. Bagozzi, Causal Models in Marketing (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1980).
Richard P. Bagozzi, “Evaluating Structural Equation Models With Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: A Comment,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (August 1981), 375–81.
R. S. Burt, “Confirmatory Factor-Analytic Structures and the Theory Construction Process,” Sociological Methods and Research2, No. 2 (November 1973), 131–90.
Gilbert A. Churchill, Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations, (Hinsdale, Illinois, The Dryden Press, 1979).
H. L. Costner and R. Schoenberg, “Diagnosing Indicator in Multiple Indicator Models,” in Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences, edited by A. S. Goldberger and O. D. Duncan, 1967–199, Seminar Press, (1973).
C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (February 1981), 39–50.
Paul E. Green, “On the Design of Multiattribute Choice Experiments Involving Large Numbers of Factors and Factor Levels,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. I, S. Ward and P. Wright, eds., Urbana, Illinois: Association for Consumer Research, (1974).
J. E. Hunter, “Factor Analysis,” in Multivariate Techniques in Human Communication Research, eds., P. R. Monge & J. N. Cappella, New York: Academic Press, (1980), p. 229–57.
Arun K. Jain, Franklin Acito, Naresk K. Malhotra, and Vijay Mahajan, “A Comparison of The Internal Validity of Alternate Parameter Estimation Methods in Decompositional Multiattribute Preference Models,” Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (August 1979), 313–22.
Karl G. Jöreskog, “Testing Simple Structure Hypothesis in Factor Analysis,” Psychometrika, 31,(1966), 165–178.
Karl G. Jöreskog, “Some Contributions to Maximum-Likelihood Factor Analysis,” Psychometrika, 32, (1967), 443–482.
Karl G., Joreskog, “A General Approach to Confirmatory Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis,” Psychometrika, 34, (1969), 183–202.
Karl G. Jöreskog, “A General Method for Estimating a Linear Structural Equation System,” In Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences, edited by A. S. Goldberger and O. D. Duncan, 85–112, New York: Seminar Press, (1973).
Karl G. Jöreskog, “Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences: Specification, Estimation, and Testing,” In Application of Statistics, edited by P. R. Krishnaiah, 265–87, North-Holland Publishing Co., (1977).
Kark G. Jöreskog and Dag Sörbom, Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood, (Chicago, Illinois, National Educational Resources, Inc., 1978).
Joseph B. Kruskal, “Analysis of Factorial Experiments by Estimating Monotone Transformations of the Data,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (March 1965), 251–63.
Jum C. Nunnally, Psychometric Theory, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967).
Barnett R. Parker and V. Srinivasan, “A Consumer Preference Approach to the Planning of Rural Primary Health Care Facilities,” Operations Research, 24 (September-October 1976), 991–1025.
R. Schoenberg, MILS: Multiple Indicator Linear Structural Models, (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20205, 1981).
Jerome E. Scott and Peter Wright, “Modeling an Organizational Buyer’s Product Evaluation Strategy: Validity and Procedural Considerations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 13 (August 1976), 221–4.
L. R. Tucker and C. Lewis, “A Reliability Coefficient for Maximum-Likelihood Factor Analysis,” Psychometrika, 38, (1973), 1–10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science
About this paper
Cite this paper
Danes, J.E., Kosenko, R. (2015). Structural Equation Analysis of Three Methods for Evaluating Conjoint Measurement Results. In: Kothari, V. (eds) Proceedings of the 1982 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16946-0_119
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16946-0_119
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16945-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16946-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)