Abstract

Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis (ACBC) and hybrid individualized two-level choice-based conjoint analysis (HIT-CBC) were developed to improve standard choice-based conjoint analysis through additional interviewing techniques. Both methods have demonstrated their applicability in comparison to standard choice-based conjoint methods. The objective of our study was a direct comparison of the two adaptive hybrid methods ACBC and HIT-CBC. Therefore, we analysed the previous comparative literature on the methods and used the results to conduct both a Monte Carlo simulation study and an empirical study for validity comparisons. The simulation study confirms the vulnerability of HIT-CBC to produce incorrect ratings of respondents in the last part of the questionnaire. The empirical findings reveal an advantage of ACBC in comparison to the current version of HIT-CBC. We conclude that the rating tasks in the last section of HIT-CBC questionnaires reduce the predictive validity of the method and suggest an improvement to HIT-CBC.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.