Barter Markets for Conjoint Analysis

References

• Allenby G. M., Arora N., Ginter J. L. On the heterogeneity of demand. J. Marketing Res. (1998) 35(3):384–389Crossref, Google Scholar
• American Association of Advertising Agencies Corporate trade or barter—An ongoing phenomenon. (2003) September 29(American Association of Advertising Agencies, New York) . Bulletin 6295Google Scholar
• BarterNews Section one—Commercial trade exchange. BarterNews (2003) 60:8Google Scholar
• Bradlow E. T., Hu Y., Ho T.-H. A learning-based model for imputing missing levels in partial conjoint profiles. J. Marketing Res. (2004) 41(4):369–381Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C. F. Three cheers—Psychological, theoretical, empirical—for loss aversion. J. Marketing Res. (2005) 42(2):129–133Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll J. D., Green P. E. Psychometric methods in marketing research: Part I, conjoint analysis. J. Marketing Res. (1995) 32(4):385–391Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattin P., Wittink D. R. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: A survey. J. Marketing (1982) 46(3):44–53Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cresti B. US domestic barter: An empirical investigation. Appl. Econom. (2005) 37(17):1953–1966Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ding M. An incentive-aligned mechanism for conjoint analysis. J. Marketing Res. (2007) 44(2):214–223Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ding M., Grewal R., Liechty J. Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis. J. Marketing Res. (2005) 42(1):67–82Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gelman A., Rubin D. B. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statist. Sci. (1992) 7(4):457–472Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbride T. J., Allenby G. M. A choice model with conjunctive, disjunctive, and compensatory screening rules. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3):391–406Link, Google Scholar
• Godes D., Mayzlin D. Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(4):545–560Link, Google Scholar
• Green P. E., Krieger A. M. Segmenting markets with conjoint analysis. J. Marketing (1991) 55(4):20–31Crossref, Google Scholar
• Green P. E., Krieger A. M. An application of product positioning model to pharmaceutical products. Marketing Sci. (1992) 11(2):117–132Link, Google Scholar
• Green P. E., Rao V. R. Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental data. J. Marketing Res. (1971) 8(3):355–363Crossref, Google Scholar
• Green P. E., Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with implications for research and practice. J. Marketing (1990) 54(4):3–19Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hammond G. T.Countertrade, Offsets, and Barter in the World Economy (1990) (Pinter, London) Google Scholar
• Hauser J. R., Rao V. R., Wind J. Conjoint analysis, related modeling, and applications. Advances in Marketing Research: Progress and Prospects (2004) (Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York) 141–168Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson R. M. Comment on “Adaptive conjoint analysis: Some caveats and suggestions”. J. Marketing Res. (1991) 28(2):223–225Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahn B. E. Dynamic relationships with customers: High-variety strategies. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. (1998) 26(1):45–53Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kohli R., Mahajan V. A reservation-price model for optimal pricing of multiattribute products in conjoint analysis. J. Marketing Res. (1991) 28(3):347–354Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lehmann D. R. Customer reactions to variety: Too much of a good thing? J. Acad. Marketing Sci. (1998) 26(1):62–65Crossref, 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. Dynamic models with individual level heterogeneity: Applied to evolution during conjoint studies. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(2):285–293Link, Google Scholar
• Mahajan V., Green P. E., Goldberg S. M. A conjoint model for measuring self- and cross-price/demand relationships. J. Marketing Res. (1982) 19(3):334–342Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park Y.-H., Ding M., Rao V. R. Eliciting preference for complex products: A Web-based upgrading method. J. Marketing Res. (2008) 45(5):562–574Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pessemier E., Burger P., Teach R., Tigert D. Using laboratory brand preference scales to predict consumer brand purchases. Management Sci. (1971) 17(6):B371–B385Link, Google Scholar
• Toubia O., Simester D., Hauser J. R., Dahan E. Fast polyhedral adaptive conjoint estimation. Marketing Sci. (2003) 22(3):273–303Link, Google Scholar
• Verzariu P. The evolution of international barter, countertrade, and offsets practices: A survey of the 1970s through the 1990s. (2000) . U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
• Wittink D. R., Cattin P. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: An update. J. Marketing (1989) 53(3):91–96Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wittink D. R., Krishnamurthi L., Reibstein D. J. The effect of differences in the number of attribute levels on conjoint results. Marketing Lett. (1990) 1(2):113–123Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wittink D. R., Vriens M., Burhenne W. Commercial use of conjoint analysis in Europe: Results and critical reflections. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (1994) 11(1):41–52Crossref, Google Scholar