Skip navigation
Skip navigation

The impact of offering Two Versus Three Alternatives in Choice Modelling Experiments

Bennett, Jeffrey; Rolfe, John

Description

Researchers designing choice modelling experiments have some latitude over the number of choice alternatives that can be offered in each choice set. There is some evidence that design dimensions, including the number of alternatives available in each choice set, can influence model outcomes. A key issue is whether referendum formats with binary options are preferable to choice sets with multiple alternatives. A choice modelling experiment was performed where questionnaires delivered to two...[Show more]

dc.contributor.authorBennett, Jeffrey
dc.contributor.authorRolfe, John
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-10T22:23:51Z
dc.identifier.issn0921-8009
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/52995
dc.description.abstractResearchers designing choice modelling experiments have some latitude over the number of choice alternatives that can be offered in each choice set. There is some evidence that design dimensions, including the number of alternatives available in each choice set, can influence model outcomes. A key issue is whether referendum formats with binary options are preferable to choice sets with multiple alternatives. A choice modelling experiment was performed where questionnaires delivered to two split samples differed only according to whether two or three alternatives were offered to respondents in each choice set. The results indicate that more robust models could be constructed from the three-alternative split compared to the two-alternative split. One reason for the difference is that respondents tended to display serial non-participation in the two-alternative format, choosing an alternative consistently without regard for changes in the attributes. For practitioners of the CM technique, the results suggest that it may be preferable to offer more than two alternatives in a choice set that includes a status quo option.
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.sourceEcological Economics
dc.subjectKeywords: comparative study; design; experimental study; modeling; questionnaire survey Choice alternatives; Choice modelling; Design dimensions; Serial non-participation
dc.titleThe impact of offering Two Versus Three Alternatives in Choice Modelling Experiments
dc.typeJournal article
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.citationvolume68
dc.date.issued2009
local.identifier.absfor140205 - Environment and Resource Economics
local.identifier.ariespublicationu4055784xPUB261
local.type.statusPublished Version
local.contributor.affiliationBennett, Jeffrey, College of Asia and the Pacific, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationRolfe, John, Central Queensland University
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage1140
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage1148
local.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.007
dc.date.updated2016-02-24T10:33:04Z
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-58749111443
local.identifier.thomsonID000263761300020
CollectionsANU Research Publications

Download

File Description SizeFormat Image
01_Bennett_The_impact_of_offering_Two_2009.pdf466.21 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
02_Bennett_The_impact_of_offering_Two_2009.pdf513.22 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail


Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Updated:  17 November 2022/ Responsible Officer:  University Librarian/ Page Contact:  Library Systems & Web Coordinator