Abstract
Choice modelling represents the structured examination of individual decision-making among designed alternatives. Although most commonly used to examine individual choices – for example, among product alternatives where the features of the products vary – choice models can be utilized to examine any set of alternatives that can be decomposed into distinct parts, such as investments or market-entry alternatives. The most methodologically valid approach to choice modelling is discrete choice modelling, which has its basis in random utility theory (RUT) and relies on a number of simplifying assumptions to link its conceptual formulation to a specific empirical model.
This entry was originally published on Palgrave Connect under ISBN 978-1-137-49190-9. The content has not been changed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adamowicz, W., P. Boxall, M. Williams, and J. Louviere. 1998. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80: 64–75.
Auger, P., T.M. Devinney, J.J. Louviere, and P.F. Burke. 2008. Do social product features have value to consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing 25: 183–191.
Brandley, M.A., and H. Gunn. 1990. Stated preference analysis of values of travel time in the Netherlands. Transportation Research Record 1285: 78–89.
Brazell, J., T. Devinney, and D. Midgley. 2005. Relating customer value to strategic competence: A discrete choice measurement approach. Research in Competence-Based Management 1: 15–45.
Buckley, P.J., T.M. Devinney, and J.J. Louviere. 2007. Do managers behave the way theory suggests? A choice-theoretic examination of foreign direct investment location decision-making. Journal of International Business Studies 38: 1069–1094.
Carson, R.T., J.J. Louviere, D.A. Anderson, P.B. Arabie, D.A. Hensher, R.M. Johnson, W.F. Kuhfeld, D. Steinberg, J. Swait, H. Timmermans, and J.B. Wiley. 1994. Experimental analysis of choice. Marketing Letters 5: 351–368.
Crouch, G.I., T.M. Devinney, J.J. Louviere, and T. Islam. 2009. Modelling consumer choice behaviour in space tourism. Tourism Management 30: 441–454.
DeSarbo, W.S., R. Grewal, and J. Wind. 2006. Who competes with whom? A demand-based perspective for identifying and representing asymmetric competition. Strategic Management Journal 27: 101–129.
Drasgow, F., O.S. Chernyshenko, and S. Stark. 2010. 75 years after Likert: Thurstone was right! Industrial & Organizational Psychology 3: 465–476.
Haider, W., and G.O. Ewing. 1990. A model of tourist choices of hypothetical Caribbean destination. Leisure Sciences 12: 33–47.
Hensher, D.A. 1989. Urban tollways and the valuation of travel time savings. Economic Record 66: 146–156.
Kamakura, W.A., and R.K. Srivastava. 1984. Predicting choice shares under conditions of brand interdependence. Journal of Marketing Research 21: 420–434.
Koelemeijer, K., and H. Oppewal. 1999. Assessing the effects of assortment and ambience: A choice experimental approach. Journal of Retailing 75: 319–345.
Louviere, J.J., T.C. Eagle, and S.H. Cohen. 2005. Conjoint analysis: Methods, myths and much more. CenSoC Working paper No. 05-001. Sydney.
Louviere, J.J., T.N. Flynn, and R.T. Carson. 2011. Discrete choice experiments are not conjoint analysis. Journal of Choice Modelling 3: 57–72.
Marschak, J. 1960. Binary choice constraints on random utility indications. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
McFadden, D. 1973. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. New York: Academic.
Moore, W.L., J.J. Louviere, and R. Verma. 1999. Using conjoint analysis to help design product platforms. Journal of Product Innovation Management 16: 27–39.
Priem, R.L., B.A. Walters, and S. Li. 2011. Decisions, decisions! How judgment policy studies can integrate macro and micro domains in management research. Journal of Management 37: 553–580.
Propper, C. 1995. The disutility of time spent on the United Kingdom’s National Health Service waiting lists. Journal of Human Resources 30: 677–700.
Spector, P.E., and M.T. Brannick. 2010. If Thurstone was right, what happens when we factor analyze Likert scales? Industrial & Organizational Psychology 3: 502–503.
Street, D.J., and L. Burgess. 2007. The construction of optimal stated choice experiments: Theory and methods. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience.
Street, D.J., L. Burgess, and J.J. Louviere. 2005. Quick and easy choice sets: Constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing 22: 459–470.
Thurstone, L. 1927. A law of comparative judgement. Psychological Review 34: 273–286.
Wedel, M., and W.A. Kamakura. 2000. Market segmentation: Conceptual and methodological foundations. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this entry
Cite this entry
Devinney, T., Lin, N. (2016). Choice Modelling. In: Augier, M., Teece, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_573-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_573-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-94848-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Business and ManagementReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences