Abstract

Many elicitation modes for collecting preference judgments are available in marketing to estimate the weight of a product attribute in the formation of preferences for a product. The use of different elicitation modes may lead to preference reversals and systematic differences in attribute weights. The three objectives of this article are (1) to clarify the elicitation mode classification using four criteria – incentive versus stated modes, direct versus indirect, monetary versus non-monetary, and joint versus separate; (2) to highlight the systematic biases related to each elicitation mode; and (3) to present theories to explain the underweighting or overweighting of product attributes across elicitation modes. The results from prior research show that, overall, incentive elicitation modes (indirect) lead to closer attribute weights compared to the market ones than the stated (direct) modes. While no clear consensus appears in the literature regarding monetary versus non-monetary or joint versus separate modes, this article offers predictions and an explanatory framework of the potential attribute’s overweight or underweight, depending on the chosen preference elicitation modes.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call