IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iamodp/124.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Untersuchung der Präferenzen russischer Fachbesucher für ausgewählte Messeleistungen
[Analysis of preferences of Russian trade visitors for selected exhibit attributes]

Author

Listed:
  • Möser, Nataliya

Abstract

Der vorliegende Beitrag analysiert Präferenzen russischer Fachbesucher für ausgewählte Messeleistungen. Als Methode wurde die Choice-Based Conjoint Analyse eingesetzt, die eine realitätsnahe Erfassung von Auswahlentscheidungen und somit die Abbildung des Verhaltens der Probanden ermöglicht. Mit Hilfe des Latent Class Verfahrens wurden anschließend insgesamt zwei Segmente mit unterschiedlichen Präferenzen für Eintrittspreis, Internetseite, Fachprogramm, Präsentationen sowie Besucherservice ermittelt.

Suggested Citation

  • Möser, Nataliya, 2009. "Untersuchung der Präferenzen russischer Fachbesucher für ausgewählte Messeleistungen [Analysis of preferences of Russian trade visitors for selected exhibit attributes]," IAMO Discussion Papers 124, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iamodp:124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/32796/1/611705273.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baier, Daniel & Gaul, Wolfgang, 1998. "Optimal product positioning based on paired comparison data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 365-392, November.
    2. Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Herrmann & Frank Huber, 2007. "Conjoint Analysis as an Instrument of Market Research Practice," Springer Books, in: Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Herrmann & Frank Huber (ed.), Conjoint Measurement, edition 0, chapter 1, pages 3-30, Springer.
    3. Wayne S. DeSarbo & Christian F. DeSarbo, 2007. "A Generalized Normative Segmentation Methodology Employing Conjoint Analysis," Springer Books, in: Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Herrmann & Frank Huber (ed.), Conjoint Measurement, edition 0, chapter 16, pages 321-345, Springer.
    4. Rinus Haaijer & Michel Wedel, 2007. "Conjoint Choice Experiments: General Characteristics and Alternative Model Specifications," Springer Books, in: Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Herrmann & Frank Huber (ed.), Conjoint Measurement, edition 0, chapter 11, pages 199-229, Springer.
    5. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    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. repec:zbw:iamodp:91768 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Moser, Nataliya, 2009. "Untersuchung Der Präferenzen Russischer Fachbesucher Für Ausgewählte Messeleistungen," IAMO Discussion Papers 91768, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    3. Kick, Markus & Littich, Martina, 2015. "Brand and Reputation as Quality Signals on Regulated Markets," EconStor Preprints 182503, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. 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.
    5. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    6. Norbert Bajkó & Zsolt Fülöp & Kinga Nagyné Pércsi, 2022. "Changes in the Innovation- and Marketing-Habits of Family SMEs in the Foodstuffs Industry, Caused by the Coronavirus Pandemic in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, March.
    7. John Liechty & Duncan Fong & Eelko Huizingh & Arnaud Bruyn, 2008. "Hierarchical Bayesian conjoint models incorporating measurement uncertainty," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 141-155, June.
    8. Christian P Theurer & Andranik Tumasjan & Isabell M Welpe, 2018. "Contextual work design and employee innovative work behavior: When does autonomy matter?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-35, October.
    9. Ragna Nilssen & Geoff Bick & Russell Abratt, 2019. "Comparing the relative importance of sustainability as a consumer purchase criterion of food and clothing in the retail sector," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(1), pages 71-83, January.
    10. Kick, Markus, 2015. "The Price Premium Induced by Branding: A Health Care Case Study," EconStor Preprints 182504, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Olivier Toubia & Duncan I. Simester & John R. Hauser & Ely Dahan, 2003. "Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 273-303.
    12. Daniel V. Holland & Dean A. Shepherd, 2013. "Deciding to Persist: Adversity, Values, and Entrepreneurs’ Decision Policies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(2), pages 331-358, March.
    13. Percy Marquina & Vincent Charles, 2021. "A Bayesian resampling approach to estimate the difference in effect sizes in consumer social responses to CSR initiatives versus corporate abilities," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1680-1699, November.
    14. Xinfang (Jocelyn) Wang & Jeffrey D. Camm & David J. Curry, 2009. "A Branch-and-Price Approach to the Share-of-Choice Product Line Design Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(10), pages 1718-1728, October.
    15. Mishra, Sanjay & Umesh, U. N., 2005. "Determining the quality of conjoint analysis results using violation of a priori signs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 301-311, March.
    16. Anne Domurath & Holger Patzelt, 2016. "Entrepreneurs’ Assessments of Early International Entry: The Role of Foreign Social Ties, Venture Absorptive Capacity, and Generalized Trust in Others," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1149-1177, September.
    17. Lynd Bacon & Peter Lenk, 2012. "Augmenting discrete-choice data to identify common preference scales for inter-subject analyses," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 453-474, December.
    18. Sergii Solntsev & Zhanna Zhygalkevych & Maryna Kravchenko, 2020. "Evaluation Of Risk Impact On Implementation Of Innovation Projects Within The Framework Of Machine-Building Quasi-Integration Structures," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 6(3).
    19. Melanie Revilla & Carlos Ochoa & Albert Turbina, 2017. "Making use of Internet interactivity to propose a dynamic presentation of web questionnaires," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 1321-1336, May.
    20. Ochieng, Dennis O. & Veettil, Prakashan C. & Qaim, Matin, 2017. "Farmers’ preferences for supermarket contracts in Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 100-111.
    21. Nikou, Shahrokh & Bouwman, Harry, 2012. "Mobile service platform competition," 19th ITS Biennial Conference, Bangkok 2012: Moving Forward with Future Technologies - Opening a Platform for All 72515, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Präferenzanalyse; Choice-Based Conjoint Analyse; Benefitsegmentierung; russische Messe; Preference Analysis; Choice Based Conjoint Analysis; Benefit segmentation; Russian exhibition;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness

    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:zbw:iamodp:124. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iamoode.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.