IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v47y2013i2p1063-1076.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An empirical assessment of the cross-national measurement validity of graded paired comparisons

Author

Listed:
  • Alain De Beuckelaer
  • Jarl Kampen
  • J. Van Trijp

Abstract

The popular use of graded paired comparisons in empirical studies assessing consumers’ preferences, and the potential effect of cross-national differences in (extreme) response styles on the quality of graded paired comparison data, supply ample reasons for an empirical verification of the cross-national validity of such scales. Using data from a cross-national margarine brand study including fourteen different nations (N=4,560), we found sufficient statistical evidence for cross-national bias due to existing cross-national differences in extreme responses. However, the low values reported for effect size measures (intra-class correlation coefficient, R 2 value) indicated that the impact of the cross-national bias is marginal. The findings from our study provided empirical support for the hypothesis that graded paired comparison data can be meaningfully compared across nations. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Alain De Beuckelaer & Jarl Kampen & J. Van Trijp, 2013. "An empirical assessment of the cross-national measurement validity of graded paired comparisons," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 1063-1076, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:2:p:1063-1076
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-011-9583-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-011-9583-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-011-9583-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jecsur:v:15:y:2001:i:3:p:435-62 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. John R. Hauser & Glen L. Urban, 1977. "A Normative Methodology for Modeling Consumer Response to Innovation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 579-619, August.
    3. Harold Gulliksen, 1956. "A least squares solution for paired comparisons with incomplete data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 21(2), pages 125-134, June.
    4. Danielis, Romeo & Marcucci, Edoardo & Rotaris, Lucia, 2005. "Logistics managers' stated preferences for freight service attributes," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 201-215, May.
    5. Alan Agresti, 1992. "Analysis of Ordinal Paired Comparison Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 41(2), pages 287-297, June.
    6. Viswanathan, Madhubalan & Sudman, Seymour & Johnson, Michael, 2004. "Maximum versus meaningful discrimination in scale response:: Implications for validity of measurement of consumer perceptions about products," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 108-124, February.
    7. Roland Helm & Armin Scholl & Laura Manthey & Michael Steiner, 2004. "Measuring customer preferences in new product development: comparing compositional and decompositional methods," International Journal of Product Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 12-29.
    8. Ofir, Chezy, 2004. "Reexamining Latitude of Price Acceptability and Price Thresholds: Predicting Basic Consumer Reaction to Price," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 612-621, March.
    9. Srinivasan, V. Seenu & Netzer, Oded, 2007. "Adaptive Self-Explication of Multi-attribute Preferences," Research Papers 1979, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    10. 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.
    11. Mickael Bech & Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen & Trine Kjær & Jørgen Lauridsen & Jan Sørensen, 2007. "Graded pairs comparison ‐ does strength of preference matter? Analysis of preferences for specialised nurse home visits for pain management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 513-529, May.
    12. Jarl Kampen, 2007. "The Impact of Survey Methodology and Context on Central Tendency, Nonresponse and Associations of Subjective Indicators of Government Performance," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 793-813, December.
    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. Alain Beuckelaer & Machiel Zeeman & Hans Trijp, 2015. "Assessment of the cross-national validity of an End-anchored 9-point hedonic product liking scale," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1267-1286, May.

    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. Hafezi, Maryam & Zolfagharinia, Hossein, 2018. "Green product development and environmental performance: Investigating the role of government regulations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 395-410.
    2. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    3. Jonas Jasper, 2019. "A Var Analysis of the Connection between FDI and Economic Growth: A Case Study from Vietnam after 30 Years Reforms," International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 4(6), pages 51-67, Februaury.
    4. Jong Seok Kim, 2017. "Empirical Analysis Of Consumer Willingness To Pay For Smart Phone Attributes In Multi-Countries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(02), pages 1-37, February.
    5. Inwon Kang & Deokhee Cheon & Matthew Shin, 2011. "Advertising strategy for outbound travel services," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 5(4), pages 361-380, December.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Goedde-Menke, Michael & Langer, Thomas & Pfingsten, Andreas, 2014. "Impact of the financial crisis on bank run risk – Danger of the days after," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 522-533.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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).
    15. 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).
    16. P. A. Ferrari & S. Salini, 2008. "Measuring Service Quality: The Opinion of Europeans about Utilities," Working Papers 2008.36, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Carola Grebitus & Maria Facendola, 2011. "Consumers' preferences for geographical origin labels: evidence from the Canadian olive oil market," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(2), pages 193-212, June.
    20. Srinivasan, V. Seenu & Netzer, Oded, 2007. "Adaptive Self-Explication of Multi-attribute Preferences," Research Papers 1979, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:47:y:2013:i:2:p:1063-1076. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.