IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/nejare/29032.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing The Importance Of Apple Attributes: An Agricultural Application Of Conjoint Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Manalo, Alberto B.

Abstract

The use of conjoint analysis in assessing consumers' preferences for attributes is demonstrated with the apple as an example. Conjoint analysis may be used to estimate the importance of attributes and attribute levels through decomposition of consumers' ranking of alternative attribute combinations. It is shown that conjoint analysis provides results that may not be obtained from a survey where respondents are asked to directly state their assessment of the importance of attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Manalo, Alberto B., 1990. "Assessing The Importance Of Apple Attributes: An Agricultural Application Of Conjoint Analysis," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 19(2), pages 1-7, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nejare:29032
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.29032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/29032/files/19020118.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.29032?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Currim, Imran S & Weinberg, Charles B & Wittink, Dick R, 1981. "Design of Subscription Programs for a Performing Arts Series," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(1), pages 67-75, June.
    2. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    3. Ratchford, Brian T, 1975. "The New Economic Theory of Consumer Behavior: An Interpretive Essay," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 2(2), pages 65-75, Se.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Markovina, Jerko & Kovacic, Damir, 2008. "The Importance of Apple attributes: A Comparison of Self-explicated and Conjoint Analysis Results," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44401, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Huang, Chung L. & Fu, Joe, 1993. "Consumer Preferences And Evaluations Of A Processed Meat Product," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 1-9, February.
    3. John Stanton & Ferdinand F Wirth & Yingdao Dao, 2018. "An Analysis of Consumers’ Preferences between Locally Grown/Processed Food and Organic Food," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 4(1), pages 480-490, August.
    4. Michał Pietrzak & Aleksandra Chlebicka & Paweł Kraciński & Agata Malak-Rawlikowska, 2020. "Information Asymmetry as a Barrier in Upgrading the Position of Local Producers in the Global Value Chain—Evidence from the Apple Sector in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Eunae Son & Song Soo Lim, 2021. "Consumer Acceptance of Gene-Edited versus Genetically Modified Foods in Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Chakrabarti, Anwesha & Shonkwiler, Vanessa & Campbell, Julie, 2023. "VIDALIA Branding and Co-labeling Strategy: A Cluster Analysis of Sweet Onion Buyers and Potential Buyers," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 54(2), July.
    7. Benjamin L. Campbell & Saneliso Mhlanga & Isabelle Lesschaeve, 2016. "Market Dynamics Associated with Canadian Ethnic Vegetable Production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 64-78, January.
    8. Holland, Daniel S. & Roheim, Cathy A., 1998. "Predicting Consumer Preferences For Fresh Salmon: The Influence Of Safety Inspection And Production Method Attributes," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 1-14, April.
    9. Ismail Tamer Toklu, 2017. "Consumer Preferences for the Attributes of Sunflower Oil: An Exploratory Study with Conjoint Analysis," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 7(1), pages 39-60, January.
    10. R. Karina Gallardo & Huixin Li & Vicki McCracken & Chengyan Yue & James Luby & James R. McFerson, 2015. "Market Intermediaries’ Willingness to Pay for Apple, Peach, Cherry, and Strawberry Quality Attributes," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 259-280, April.
    11. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    12. Wirth, Ferdinand F. & Stanton, John L. & Wiley, James B., 2011. "The Relative Importance of Search versus Credence Product Attributes: Organic and Locally Grown," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-15, April.
    13. Anne Normann & Magnus Röding & Karin Wendin, 2019. "Sustainable Fruit Consumption: The Influence of Color, Shape and Damage on Consumer Sensory Perception and Liking of Different Apples," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-9, August.
    14. Gallardo, R. Karina & Li, Huixin & Yue, Chengyan & Luby, James & McFerson, James R. & McCracken, Vicki, 2015. "Market Intermediaries’ Ratings of Importance for Rosaceous Fruits’ Quality Attributes," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1-34, November.
    15. Skreli, Engjell & Imami, Drini, 2012. "Analyzing Consumers’ Preferences for Apple Attributes in Tirana, Albania," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, November.
    16. R. Karina Gallardo & Ines Hanrahan & Chengyan Yue & Vicki A. McCracken & James Luby & James R. McFerson & Carolyn Ross & Lilian Carrillo†Rodriguez, 2018. "Combining sensory evaluations and experimental auctions to assess consumers’ preferences for fresh fruit quality characteristics," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 407-425, March.
    17. Abdul-Basit Tampuli Abukari & Suad Morro & Munkaila Lambongang, 2022. "Modeling rice consumption preferences: an improved approach," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(12), pages 1-26, December.
    18. Valeeva, Natasha I. & Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & Oude Lansink, Alfons G.J.M. & Bergevoet, Ron H.M. & Huirne, Ruud B.M., 2004. "Assessing Food Safety Concepts on the Dairy Farm: The Case of Chemical Hazards," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24979, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manalo, Alberto B., 1989. "Benefits Sought by Apple Consumers," Working Papers 115908, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    2. de Bont, Cees J. P. M. & Schoormans, Jan P. L., 1995. "The effects of product expertise on consumer evaluations of new-product concepts," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 599-615, December.
    3. John R. Hauser & Steven M. Shugan, 2008. "Defensive Marketing Strategies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 88-110, 01-02.
    4. Ahlert, Dieter & Evanschitzky, Heiner & Thesing, Miriam, 2006. "Zahlungsbereitschaft im online Handel: Eine empirische Untersuchung mittels der Conjoint Analyse / Ahlert,D. / Evanschitzky, H," Working Papers 34, University of Münster, Competence Center Internet Economy and Hybrid Systems, European Research Center for Information Systems (ERCIS).
    5. Ohlwein, Martin, 2022. "Same but different - The effect of the unit of measure on the valuation of a unit price," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    6. Teichert, Thorsten Andreas, 1996. "The confounding of effects in rank-based conjoint-analysis," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 409, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    7. Wuyts, S.H.K. & Stremersch, S. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2001. "Buying High Tech Products," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-27-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    8. Tsusaka, T. & Orr, A. & Msere, H. & Harris, D. & Rao, N. Vpr Ganga, 2018. "Fuelwood or Grain? A Conjoint Analysis of Trait Preferences for Pigeonpea among Smallholders in Southern Malawi," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277435, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Winfried Steiner & Harald Hruschka, 2002. "A Probabilistic One-Step Approach to the Optimal Product Line Design Problem Using Conjoint and Cost Data," Review of Marketing Science Working Papers 1-4-1003, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    10. Merja Halme & Kari Linden & Kimmo Kääriä, 2009. "Patients’ Preferences for Generic and Branded Over-the-Counter Medicines," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 2(4), pages 243-255, December.
    11. Dufhues, T. & Buchenrieder, G., 2004. "Der Beitrag der Conjoint Analyse zur nachfrageorintierten Entwicklung des ländlichen Finanzsektors in Vietnam," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 39.
    12. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    14. Mahesh Balan U & Saji K. Mathew, 2021. "Personalize, Summarize or Let them Read? A Study on Online Word of Mouth Strategies and Consumer Decision Process," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 627-647, June.
    15. Shin, Jungwoo & Hwang, Won-Sik, 2017. "Consumer preference and willingness to pay for a renewable fuel standard (RFS) policy: Focusing on ex-ante market analysis and segmentation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 32-40.
    16. Haaijer, Marinus E., 1996. "Predictions in conjoint choice experiments : the x-factor probit model," Research Report 96B22, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    17. Ha, Jinkyung, 2018. "Consumer valuation of Fintech: The case of Mobile Payment in Korea," 22nd ITS Biennial Conference, Seoul 2018. Beyond the boundaries: Challenges for business, policy and society 190341, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    18. P. A. Ferrari & S. Salini, 2008. "Measuring Service Quality: The Opinion of Europeans about Utilities," Working Papers 2008.36, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    19. Steinhorst, M.P. & Bahrs, E., 2013. "Renditansprüche im Kontext gleichmäßiger Rückflüsse – Ergebnisse eines Experiments mit Stakeholdern des Agribusiness," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48, March.
    20. Yavuz Taşcıoğlu & Mevlüt Gül & Metin Göksel Akpınar & Bahri Karlı & Bektaş Kadakoğlu & Bekir Sıtkı Şirikçi & Musa Acar & Hilal Yılmaz, 2023. "Optimum Support Policy Component for the Development of Agricultural Production: Potato Producer," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-13, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:nejare:29032. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nareaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.