Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

upload test2

on

  • 230 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
230
Views on SlideShare
230
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    upload test2 upload test2 Presentation Transcript

    • Practical Design for Discrete Choice Experiments Bradley Jones, SAS Institute August 13, 2008 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Discrete Choice Experiment Setup  Respondents indicate the alternative they prefer most in each choice set  Alternatives are called profiles  Each profile is a combination of attribute levels  Choice sets typically consist of two, three or four profiles DEMA 2008, August 2008, 2 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Example: Marketing a new laptop computer Attributes Levels Hard Drive 40 GB 80 GB Speed 1.5 GHz 2.0 GHz Battery Life 4 hours 6 hours Price $1,000 $1,200 $1,500 DEMA 2008, August 2008, 3 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Sample Choice Set Check the box for the laptop you prefer. Hard Disk Speed Battery Price 40Gig 1.5GHz 6hours $1,000 Profile 1 40Gig 2.0GHz 4hours $1,500 Profile 2 DEMA 2008, August 2008, 4 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Statistical model multinomial logit model based on the random utilities model U js  xjsβ   js where xjs represents the attribute levels and β is the set of parameter values probability of choosing alternative j in choice set s x jsβ  option j chosen  e p js    t =1  J  in choice set s  e xtsβ DEMA 2008, August 2008, 5 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Design optimality criterion D criterion - minimize the determinant of the variance matrix of the estimators: det M 1  X,β   Equivalently – maximize the determinant of the information matrix, M. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 6 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Dependence on the unknown parameter, β S M  X,β    X Ps β   ps β  p β   X s s s s1 Bayesian optimal designs: • construct a prior distribution for the parameters • find design that performs best on average • Sándor & Wedel (2001, 2002, 2005) DEMA 2008, August 2008, 7 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Design for Nonlinear Models To design an informative experiment ….. You need to know something about the response function ….. And about the parameter values. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 8 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Bayesian D-Optimal Design Bayesian ideas are natural to cope with the fact that the information matrix, M, depends on b. Chaloner and Larntz (1986) developed a Bayesian D- Optimality criterion: Φ(d) = ∫ log det [M(b;d)] p(b) db DEMA 2008, August 2008, 9 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Computing Bayesian D-Optimal Designs A major impediment to Bayesian D-optimal design has been COMPUTATIONAL. The integral over b can be VERY SLOW. It must be computed MANY TIMES in the course of finding an optimal design. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 10 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Bayesian Computations Gotwalt, Jones and Steinberg (2007) use a quadrature method, due to Mysovskikh. This method is guaranteed to exactly integrate all polynomials up to 5th degree and all odd-degree monomials. With p parameters, it requires just O(p2) function evaluations. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 11 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Mysovskikh quadrature Assume a normal prior with independence. • Center the integral about the prior mean. • Scale each variable by its standard deviation. • Integrate over distance from the prior mean and, at each distance, over a spherical shell. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 12 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Mysovskikh quadrature continued… Radial integral: Generalized Gauss-LaGuerre quadrature, with an extra point at the origin. Spherical integrals: The Mysovskikh quadrature scheme. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 13 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Spherical integral A simplex, its edge midpoints on the sphere, and the inverses of all of these points. Simplex point weights: p(7-p)/2(p+1)2(p+2). Mid-point weights: 2(p-1)2/p(p+1)2(p+2). DEMA 2008, August 2008, 14 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Quadrature points in two dimensions Each point is both a simplex Simplex point point and a mid-point. All weights equal1/6. Mid-point DEMA 2008, August 2008, 15 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Study Description 16 Respondents – 8 developers 8 sales & marketing 9 Male 7 Female 2 Surveys with 6 choice sets in each Respondents were assigned randomly to surveys blocked by job function DEMA 2008, August 2008, 16 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Software Demonstration DEMA 2008, August 2008, 17 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • Conclusions 1) Discrete Choice Conjoint Experiments require design methods for nonlinear models. 2) D-Optimal Bayesian designs reduce the dependence of the design on the unknown parameters. 3) New quadrature methods make computation of these designs much faster. 4) Commercial software makes carrying out such studies simple and efficient. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 18 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge
    • References Atkinson, A. C. and Donev, A. N. (1992). Optimum Experimental Designs, Oxford U.K.: Clarendon Press. Cassity C.R., (1965) “Abscissas, Coefficients, and Error Term for the Generalized Gauss-Laguerre Quadrature Formula Using the Zero Ordinate,” Mathematics ofComputation, 19, 287-296. Chaloner, K. and Verdinelli, I. (1995). Bayesian experimental design: a re-view, Statistical Science 10: 273-304. Grossmann, H., Holling, H. and Schwabe, R. (2002). Advances in optimum experimental design for conjoint analysis and discrete choice models, in Advances in Econometrics, Econometric Models in Marketing, Vol. 16, Franses, P. H. and Montgomery, A. L., eds. Amsterdam: JAI Press, 93-117. Gotwalt, C., Jones, B. and Steinberg, D. (2009) Fast Computation of Designs Robust to Parameter Uncertainty for Nonlinear Settings accepted at Technometrics. Huber, J. and Zwerina, K. (1996). The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs, Journal of Marketing Research 33: 307- 317. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior, in Frontiers in Econometrics, Zarembka, P., ed. New York: Academic Press, 105-142. Meyer, R. K. and Nachtsheim, C. J. (1995). The coordinate-exchange algorithm for constructing exact optimal experimental designs, Technometrics 37: 60-69. Monahan, J. and Genz, A. (1997). Spherical-radial integration rules for Bayesian computation, Journal of the American Statistical Association 92: 664-674. Sandor, Z. and Wedel, M. (2001). Designing conjoint choice experiments using managers' prior beliefs, Journal of Marketing Research 38: 430-444. DEMA 2008, August 2008, 19 Copyright © 2008, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Cambridge