Author:
Eimecke Jörgen,Baier Daniel
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Reference17 articles.
1. Akaah, I. P., & Korgorgaonkar, P. K. (1983). An empirical comparison of the predictive validity of self-explicated, huber-hybrid, traditional conjoint, and hybrid conjoint models. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(2), 187–197.
2. Dorsch, M. J., & Teas, R. K. (1992). A test of the convergent validity of self-explicated and decompositional conjoint measurement. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 37–48.
3. Eckert, J., & Schaaf, R. (2009). Verfahren zur Präferenzmessung – Eine Übersicht und Beurteilung existierender und möglicher neuer Self-Explicated-Verfahren. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 59(1), 31–56.
4. Green, P. E., Goldberg, S. M., & Montemayor, M. (1981). A hybrid utility estimation model for conjoint analysis. Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 33–41.
5. Green, P. E., & Krieger, A. M. (1993). Conjoint analysis with product positioning applications. In Eliashberg, J. & Lilien, G. (Eds.), Handbook in operations research and management science (Vol. 5, pp. 467–515). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献