Skip to Main Content
U.S. Forest Service
Caring for the land and serving people

United States Department of Agriculture

Home > Search > Publication Information

  1. Share via EmailShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on Twitter
    Dislike this pubLike this pub
    Author(s): Kevin J. Boyle; Thomas P. Holmes; Mario F. Teisl; Brian Roe
    Date: 2001
    Source: Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 83(2) (May 2001): 441-454
    Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
    PDF: View PDF  (477 KB)


    A split-sample design is used to evaluate the convergent validity of three response formats used in conjoint analysis experiments. WC investigate whether recoding rating data to rankings and choose-one formats, and recoding ranking data to choose one. result in structural models and welfare estimates that are statistically indistinguishable from estimates based on ranking or choose-one questions. Our results indicate that convergent validity of ratings, ranks, and choose one is not established. in addition, WC: find that people frequently use "ties" in responses to rating questions. and that the option not to choose any of the alternatives ("opt-out") affects some preference estimates.

    Publication Notes

    • You may send email to to request a hard copy of this publication.
    • (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
    • We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
    • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.


    Boyle, Kevin J.; Holmes, Thomas P.; Teisl, Mario F.; Roe, Brian. 2001. A Comparison of Conjoint Analysis Response Formats. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 83(2) (May 2001): 441-454


    conjoint analysis. convergent validity. forest valuation. hicksian surplus

    Related Search

    XML: View XML
Show More
Show Fewer
Jump to Top of Page