Reference health

Adjusting Choice Models to Better Predict Market Behavior

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-005-5885-1
CiteStamped reference-health badge
22/22 checkable references clean · checked 2026-08-09

Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.

15 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.

The 22 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1287/mksc.1030.0022
A Choice Model for Packaged Goods: Dealing with Discrete Quantities and Quantity Discounts
resolves10.1287/mksc.19.2.185.11802
Looking for Loss Aversion in Scanner Panel Data: The Confounding Effect of Price Response Heterogeneity
resolves10.1007/BF00999209
Combining revealed and stated preferences data
resolves10.1177/002224299005400304
The Price Knowledge and Search of Supermarket Shoppers
resolves10.1287/mksc.1030.0032
A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules
resolves10.1086/208721
Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook
resolves10.1287/mksc.11.2.133
New Brand Positioning and Pricing in an Oligopolistic Market
resolves10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_15
Stating Preference for the Ethereal but Choosing the Concrete: How the Tangibility of Attributes Affects Attribute Weighting in Value Elicitation and Choice
resolves10.1177/002224379303000109
The Effectiveness of Alternative Preference Elicitation Procedures in Predicting Choice
resolves10.1177/002224379603300305
The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs
resolves10.1006/obhd.2001.2955
Expressing Preferences in a Principal-Agent Task: A Comparison of Choice, Rating, and Matching
resolves10.2139/ssrn.552862
Volumetric Conjoint Analysis
resolves10.1287/mksc.21.3.229.143
Modeling Consumer Demand for Variety
resolves10.1002/for.3980110703
Hierarchical bayes forecasts of multinomial dirichlet data applied to coupon redemptions
resolves10.1287/mksc.9.1.42
New Models from Old: Forecasting Product Adoption by Hierarchical Bayes Procedures
resolves10.1177/002224378302000403
Design and Analysis of Simulated Consumer Choice or Allocation Experiments: An Approach Based on Aggregate Data
resolves10.1287/mksc.21.4.398.130
How Much Does the Market Value an Improvement in a Product Attribute?
resolves10.2139/ssrn.928449
Unobserved Preference Changes in Conjoint Analysis
resolves10.1016/S0378-3758(02)00399-3
Optimal and near-optimal pairs for the estimation of effects in 2-level choice experiments
resolves10.1509/jmkr.41.1.116.25082
Polyhedral Methods for Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis
resolves10.1017/CBO9780511753930
Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation
resolves10.1214/aoms/1177699475
Invariance of Maximum Likelihood Estimators
The 15 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedChrzan, Keith and Michael Patterson. (1999). “Comparing the Ability of Full and Partial Profile Choice Experiments to Predict Holdout Choices,” Paper presented at AMA's ART Forum, Santa Fe, NM, 1999.
no DOI — not checkedDeSarbo, Wayne S. and Paul E. Green. (1984). “Concepts, Theory, and Techniques, Choice-Constrained Conjoint Analysis,” Decision Science 15, 291–323.
no DOI — not checkedFennell, Geraldine. (1997). “Value and Values: Relevance to Advertising.” In L. Kahle and L. Chiagouris (eds.), Values, Lifestyles, and Psychographics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
no DOI — not checkedFennell, Geraldine. (1988). “Action as Counterchange: Identifying Antecedents of the Domain and Goal of Action,” In L. Alwitt (ed.), Proceedings 95th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
no DOI — not checkedGilbride, Timothy J., Greg M. Allenby, and Jeff Brazell. (2004). “Models of Heterogeneous Variable Selection,” Working paper, Ohio State University.
no DOI — not checkedHorsky, Dan, Paul Nelson, and Sanjog Misra. (2004). “Observed and Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity in Brand Choice Models,” working paper, Simon School of Business University of Rochester.
no DOI — not checkedHuber, Joel. (2004). “The Distorting Impact of Dominance and Compromise in Choice Based Conjoint,” Paper presented at AMA's ART Forum, Whistler, Canada, 2004.
no DOI — not checkedJohnson, Rich and Bryan Orme. (1996). “How Many Questions Should You Ask in Choice-Based Conjoint Studies,” Technical Report, Sawtooth Software: available at http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/technicaldownloads.shtml#howmany.
no DOI — not checkedJohnson, Rich, Joel Huber, and Lynd Bacon. (2003). “Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint”. In Proceedings of the 10th Sawtooth Software Conference, April 2003, San Antonio, Texas.
no DOI — not checkedKuhfeld, Warren. (2004). “Experimental Designs, Efficiency, Coding and Choice Designs,” Technical Report TS-722C, SAS: available at http://support.sas.com/techsup/tnote/tnote_stat.html
no DOI — not checkedLouviere, Jordan L., Deborah J. Street, and Leonie Burgess. (2003). “A 20+ Years Retrospective on Choice Experiments”. In Yoram Wind and Paul E. Green (eds.), Market Research and Methodology: Progress and Prospects, New York: Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 201–214.
no DOI — not checkedOrme, Bryan and Gary Baker. (2000). “Comparing Hierarchical Bayes Draws and Randomized First Choice for Conjoint Simulations”. In Proceedings of the 8th Sawtooth Software Conference, March 2000, Hilton Head Island, South Carolina.
no DOI — not checkedRenken, Tim, Greg Rogers, and Joel Huber. (2004). “A Comparison of Conjoint and Scanner Data-Based Price Elasticity Estimates,” Paper presented at AMA's ART Forum, Whistler, Canada, 2004.
no DOI — not checkedSeverin, Valerie C., Leonie Burgess, Jordan Louviere, and Deborah J. Street. (2004). “Comparing Statistical Efficiency and Respondent Efficiency in Choice Experiments,” working paper, Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
no DOI — not checkedSonnier, Garrett, Andrew Ainslie, and Thomas Otter. (2004). “The Effects of Different Parameterizations on Heterogeneous Choice Models,” working paper, UCLA
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings, or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.

checked 2026-08-09 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record

Embed this badge

Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.

<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11002-005-5885-1"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11002-005-5885-1/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[![CiteStamped reference-health badge](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11002-005-5885-1/badge.svg)](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1007/s11002-005-5885-1)