IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/anm/alpnmr/v9y2021i2p179-216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Game-Theoretical Approach to Conjoint Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Tutku Tuncalı Yaman
  • Özgür Çakır

Abstract

The study aims to combine the results of Conjoint Analysis, which is frequently used to determine customer preferences in marketing and market research areas, with Game Theory as suggested in the article of Choi and DeSarbo (1993). In this context, the application of the proposed approach was made within the framework of the factors affecting private university preferences of university candidates and the marketing decisions of school administrations. Student preferences were determined by the choice-based conjoint analysis method. As a result of a study conducted with 296 prospective students who were in the selection process after the 2016 university entrance exams. The reasons for preference in order of importance were determined as the availability of the program to be studied, the academic reputation of the school, and campus facilities. The data relating to the characteristics of university managements care in their marketing activities obtained from the interviews with the school administrators and the data obtained from the Conjoint Analysis of students’ reasons for preference were used as input in the payoff matrix organized in the context of Game Theory, and the solution of the game was completed as a two-person zero-sum game. As a result of the application of the method with empirical data, it is observed that how student preferences will change when the weights of strategic marketing factors change in the decisions taken by school administrations from the business point of view. In addition, with the help of this approach and by obtaining competitor data, it allows to describe the situation of the market in general and to make a comparative evaluation of each university on its own.

Suggested Citation

  • Tutku Tuncalı Yaman & Özgür Çakır, 2021. "A Game-Theoretical Approach to Conjoint Analysis," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 9(2), pages 179-216, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:anm:alpnmr:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:179-216
    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17093/alphanumeric.883432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.alphanumericjournal.com/media/Issue/volume-9-issue-2-2021/a-game-theoretical-approach-to-conjoint-analysis.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://alphanumericjournal.com/article/a-game-theoretical-approach-to-conjoint-analysis
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/http://dx.doi.org/10.17093/alphanumeric.883432?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. Green, Paul E & DeSarbo, Wayne S, 1978. "Additive Decomposition of Perceptions Data Via Conjoint Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(1), pages 58-65, June.
    2. Steffen Lemke & Athanasios Mazarakis & Isabella Peters, 2021. "Conjoint analysis of researchers' hidden preferences for bibliometrics, altmetrics, and usage metrics," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(6), pages 777-792, June.
    3. John R. Hauser & Felix Eggers & Matthew Selove, 2019. "The Strategic Implications of Scale in Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 1059-1081, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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).
    2. Meißner, Martin & Pfeiffer, Jella & Peukert, Christian & Dietrich, Holger & Pfeiffer, Thies, 2020. "How virtual reality affects consumer choice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 219-231.
    3. Gaurav Khatwani & Gopal Das, 2016. "Evaluating combination of individual pre-purchase internet information channels using hybrid fuzzy MCDM technique: demographics as moderators," International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 28-49.
    4. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    5. 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.
    6. YiChun Miriam Liu & Jeff D. Brazell & Greg M. Allenby, 2022. "Non-linear pricing effects in conjoint analysis," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 397-430, December.
    7. Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W. & Bettman, James R., 2000. "Coping with Unfavorable Attribute Values in Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 274-299, March.
    8. Shih-Ping Jeng, 2008. "Effects of corporate reputations, relationships and competing suppliers' marketing programmes on customers' cross-buying intentions," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 15-26, January.
    9. Felix Eggers & Fabian Eggers, 2022. "Drivers of autonomous vehicles—analyzing consumer preferences for self-driving car brand extensions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 89-112, March.
    10. Salvatore Greco & Alessio Ishizaka & Menelaos Tasiou & Gianpiero Torrisi, 2019. "On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 61-94, January.
    11. Stich, Lucas & Spann, Martin & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2022. "Paying for open access," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 273-286.
    12. Hauser, John R. & Wisniewski, Kenneth J., 1981. "Application, predictive test, and strategy implications for a dynamic model of consumer response to marketing," Working papers 1244-81., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    13. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & Eggers, Felix & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2022. "Competing Standard-Setting Organizations: A Choice Experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    14. Liu, Jiapeng & Wang, Yan & Kadziński, Miłosz & Mao, Xiaoxin & Rao, Yuan, 2024. "A multiple criteria Bayesian hierarchical model for analyzing heterogeneous consumer preferences," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    15. Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2021. "Researchers’ attitudes towards the h-index on Twitter 2007–2020: criticism and acceptance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5361-5368, June.
    16. Stefan Stremersch & Elke Cabooter & Ivan Guitart & Nuno Camacho, 2024. "Customer insights for innovation : A framework and research agenda for marketing," Post-Print hal-04731671, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Conjoint Analysis; Game Theory; University Preference;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C46 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Specific Distributions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:anm:alpnmr:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:179-216. 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: Bahadir Fatih Yildirim (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.alphanumericjournal.com/ .

    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.