Skip to main content

Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis in Australia and New Zealand

  • Conference paper
Proceedings of the 1997 World Marketing Congress

Abstract

This study reports the trend and frequency of use of conjoint analysis by Australasian market research suppliers. Based on the response of 28 market research firms, this study documents a total of 435 applications for the period up to 1996. The results are compared with two earlier studies conducted in the United States and Europe.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Cattin Phillipe and Dick R. Wittink, 1982. “Commercial use of conjoint analysis: A survey.” Journal of Marketing 46, 44-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green Paul E. and Vithal Rao 1971. “Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgemental data.” Journal of Marketing Research 8, 355-63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green Paul E. and Venkat Srinivasan 1990. “Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practice.” Journal of 54,3-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green Paul E. and Venkat Srinivasan 1978. “Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook.” Journal of Consumer Research 5, 103-123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Richard M. 1974. “Trade-off analysis of consumer values.” Journal of Marketing Research 11, 121-127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulye Rajendra 1996. “An empirical comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and conjoint analysis.” In the proceedings of the 1996 Australian Marketing Educators’ conference, Eds. Christopher Riquier and Byron Sharp, Adelaide, 399-419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittink Dick R. and Phillipe Cattin, 1989. “Commercial use of conjoint analysis : An update.” Journal of Marketing 53, 91-96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittink Dick R., Marco Vriens and W. Burhenne 1994. “Commercial use of conjoint analysis in Europe: results and critical reflections.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 11, 41-52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science

About this paper

Cite this paper

Mulye, R. (2015). Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis in Australia and New Zealand. In: Sidin, S., Manrai, A. (eds) Proceedings of the 1997 World Marketing Congress. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17320-7_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics