Greedoid-Based Noncompensatory Inference

References

• Bettman J. R., Park L. W. Effects of prior knowledge and experience and phase of the choice process on consumer decision processes: A protocol analysis. J. Consumer Res. (1980) 7(3):234–248Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman J. R., Luce M. F., Payne J. W. Constructive consumer choice processes. J. Consumer Res. (1998) 25(3, Dec):187–217Crossref, Google Scholar
• Björner A., Ziegler G. M., White N. Introduction to greedoids. Matroid Applications, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications (1992) 40(Cambridge University Press, London, UK) 284–357Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bröder A. Assessing the empirical validity of the “Take the Best” heuristic as a model of human probabilistic inference. J. Experiment. Psych.: Learn., Memory, Cognition (2000) 26(5):1332–1346Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cui D., Curry D. Prediction in marketing using the support vector machine. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(4):595–615Link, Google Scholar
• Dawes R. M. The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. Amer. Psychologist (1979) 34:571–582Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeSarbo W. S., Lehmann D. R., Carpenter G., Sinha I. A stochastic multidimensional unfolding approach for representing phased decision outcomes. Psychometrica (1996) 61(Sept):485–508Crossref, Google Scholar
• Einhorn H. J. The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making. Psych. Bull. (1970) 73(3):221–230Crossref, Google Scholar
• Einhorn H. J., Hogarth R. M. Behavioral decision theory: Processes of judgment and choice. Annual Rev. Psych. (1981) 32:52–88Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evgeniou T., Boussios C., Zacharia G. Generalized robust conjoint estimation. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(3):415–429Link, Google Scholar
• Fishburn P. C. Lexicographic orders, utilities and decision rules: A survey. Management Sci. (1974) 20(11):1442–1471Link, Google Scholar
• Frederick S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. J. Econom. Perspectives (2005) 19(2):25–42Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gensch D. H. A two-stage disaggregate attribute choice model. Marketing Sci. (1987) 6(Summer):223–231Link, Google Scholar
• Gensch D. H., Soofi E. S. Information-theoretic estimation of individual consideration sets. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (1995) 12(May):25–38Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer G., Goldstein D. G. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psych. Rev. (1996) 1003(4):650–669Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbride T., Allenby G. M. A choice model with conjunctive, disjunctive, and compensatory screening rules. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3, Summer):391–406Link, Google Scholar
• Green P. E., Krieger A. M., Bansal P. Completely unacceptable levels in conjoint analysis: A cautionary note. J. Marketing Res. (1988) 25(Aug):293–300Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griffin A., Hauser J. R. The voice of the customer. Marketing Sci. (1993) 12(1, Winter):1–27Link, Google Scholar
• Hauser J. R. Testing the accuracy, usefulness and significance of probabilistic models: An information theoretic approach. Oper. Res. (1978) 26(3, May–June):406–421Link, Google Scholar
• Hauser J. R., Toubia O. The impact of utility balance and endogeneity in conjoint analysis. Marketing Sci. (2006) 24(3):498–507Link, Google Scholar
• Hauser J. R., Wernerfelt B. An evaluation cost model of consideration sets. J. Consumer Res. (1990) 16(Mar):393–408Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hauser J. R., Tellis G., Griffin A. Research on innovation: A review and agenda for Marketing Science. Marketing Sci. (2005) 25(6):687–717Link, Google Scholar
• Held M., Karp R. M. A dynamic programming approach to sequencing problems. SIAM J. Appl. Math. (1962) 10(1):196–210Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huber J., Ariely G., Fischer D. Expressing preferences in a principal-agent task: A comparison of choice, rating and matching. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (2002) 87(1, Jan):66–90Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jedidi K., Kohli R. Probabilistic subset-conjunctive models for heterogeneous consumers. J. Marketing Res. (2005) 42(3):483–494Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jedidi K., Kohli R., DeSarbo W. S. Consideration sets in conjoint analysis. J. Marketing Res. (1996) 33(Aug):364–372Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson E. J., Meyer R. J. Compensatory choice models of noncompensatory processes: The effect of varying context. J. Consumer Res. (1984) 11(1, June):528–541Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson E. J., Meyer R. J., Ghose S. When choice models fail: Compensatory models in negatively correlated environments. J. Marketing Res. (1989) 26(Aug):255–290Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson R. Comment on adaptive conjoint analysis: Some caveats and suggestions. J. Marketing Res. (1991) 28(May):223–225Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kendall M. G.Rank Correlation Methods (1975) (Charles Griffin & Company, Ltd., London, UK) Google Scholar
• Kim J. G. Dynamic heterogeneous choice heuristics: A Bayesian hidden Markov mixture model approach. (2004) . Working paper, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Klein N. M. Assessing unacceptable attribute levels in conjoint analysis. Adv. Consumer Res. (1988) 14:154–158Google Scholar
• Kohli R., Jedidi K. Representation and inference of lexicographic preference models and their variants. Marketing Sci. (2004) 26(3):380–399Link, Google Scholar
• Kohli R., Krishnamurthi R., Jedidi K. Subset-conjunctive rules for breast cancer diagnosis. Discrete Appl. Math. (2006) 154(7):1100–1132Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korte B., Lovász L. Basis graphs of greedoid and two-connectivity. Math. Programming Stud. (1985) 24:158–165Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korte B., Lovász L., Schrader R. Greedoids. Algorithms and Combinatorics Series (1991) 4(Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lenk P. J., DeSarbo W. S., Green P. E., Young M. R. Hierarchical Bayes conjoint analysis: Recovery of partworth heterogeneity from reduced experimental designs. Marketing Sci. (1996) 15(2):173–191Link, Google Scholar
• Liechty J. C., Fong D. K. H., DeSarbo W. S. Dynamic models incorporating individual heterogeneity: Utility evolution in conjoint analysis. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(3):285–293Link, Google Scholar
• Lohse G. J., Johnson E. J. A comparison of two process tracing methods for choice tasks. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (1996) 68(1, Oct):28–43Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luce M. F., Payne J. W., Bettman J. R. Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. J. Marketing Res. (1999) 36:143–159Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malhotra N. An approach to the measurement of consumer preferences using limited information. J. Marketing Res. (1986) 23(Feb):33–40Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martignon L., Hoffrage U. Fast, frugal, and fit: Simple heuristics for paired comparisons. Theory Decision (2002) 52:29–71Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell T. M.Machine Learning (1997) (WCB McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
• Montgomery H., Svenson O. On decision rules and information processing strategies for choices among multiattribute alternatives. Scandinavian J. Psych. (1976) 17:283–291Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nakamura Y. Lexicographic quasilinear utility. J. Math. Econom. (2002) 37:157–178Crossref, Google Scholar
• Niño-Mora J. On certain greedoid polyhedra, partially indexable scheduling problems, and extended restless bandit allocation indices. (2000) . Economics Working Papers 456, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu FabraGoogle Scholar
• Olshavsky R. W., Acito F. An information processing probe into conjoint analysis. Decision Sci. (1980) 11(July):451–470Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oppewal H., Louviere J. J., Timmermans H. J. P. Modeling hierarchical conjoint processes with integrated choice experiments. J. Marketing Res. (1994) 31(Feb):92–105Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne J. W. Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search. Organ. Behav. Human Performance (1976) 16:366–387Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne J. W., Bettman J. R., Johnson E. J. Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. J. Experiment. Psych.: Lear., Memory, Cognition (1988) 14:534–552Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne J. W., Bettman E. J., Johnson J. R.The Adaptive Decision Maker (1993) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reeves R.Reality in Advertising (1961) (Knopf Publishing, New York) Google Scholar
• Roberts J. H., Lattin J. M. Development and testing of a model of consideration set composition. J. Marketing Res. (1991) 28(Nov):429–440Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rossi P. E., Allenby G. M. Bayesian statistics and marketing. Marketing Sci. (2003) 22(3, Summer):304–328Link, Google Scholar
• Shugan S. M. The cost of thinking. J. Consumer Res. (1980) 7(2, Sept):99–111Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srinivasan V., Aronson J. E., Zionts S. A strict paired comparison linear programming approach to nonmetric conjoint analysis. Operations Research: Methods, Models, and Applications (1998) (Quorum Books, Westport, CT) 97–111Google Scholar
• Srinivasan V., Park C. S. Surprising robustness of the self-explicated approach to customer preference structure measurement. J. Marketing Res. (1997) 34(May):286–291Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srinivasan V., Shocker A. Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences. Psychometrika (1973) 38(3, Sept):337–369Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srinivasan V., Wyner G. A., Henry W., Menasco M., Takada K. Casemap: Computer-assisted self-explication of multiattributed preferences. Handbook on New Product Development and Testing (1988) (D. C. Heath, Lexington, MA) 91–112Google Scholar
• Swait J. A noncompensatory choice model incorporating cutoffs. Transportation Res. (2001) 35(Part B):903–928Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thorngate W. Efficient decision heuristics. Behavioral Sci. (1980) 25(May):219–225Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toubia O., Simester D. I., Hauser J. R., Dahan E. Fast polyhedral adaptive conjoint estimation. Marketing Sci. (2003) 22(3, Summer):273–303Link, Google Scholar
• Tversky A. Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psych. Rev. (1972) 79:281–299Crossref, Google Scholar
• Urban G. L., Hauser J. R. “Listening-in” to find and explore new combinations of customer needs. J. Marketing (2004) 68(Apr):72–87Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zaltman G. Rethinking market research: Putting people back in. J. Marketing Res. (1997) 23(Nov):424–437Crossref, Google Scholar