Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer

By David A. Hensher, John M. Rose, William H. Greene. 2005

3,206 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c19b58d3e05a20921856287e128512eb0317bb88

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems

Citations in the corpus

Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. (2016, methodology): “Two commonly used methods for categorical coding of attribute levels are effects coding and dummy-variable coding [41,45].”
Willingness to pay for flying carbon neutral in Australia: an exploratory study of offsetter profiles (2014, background): “As there were two attributes with four levels and seven attributes with two levels, the minimum number of choice sets is fourteen (Hensher et al., 2005).”
How to do (or not to do) ... Designing a discrete choice experiment for application in a low-income country. (2009, methodology): “Furthermore, the same methods for analysing DCE data apply irrespective of the study context and are well documented elsewhere (Louviere et al. 2000; Hensher et al. 2005).”
Discrete Choice Experiments Are Not Conjoint Analysis (2010, background): “See Hensher et al. (2005) for a useful discussion. obvious that individuals can choose more than one option at a time or over time.”
Modelling mode choice for freight transport using advanced choice experiments (2015, background): “These authors treat attributes as discrete variables considering effects coding when defining the corresponding dummies (Hensher et al. 2005), and they find significant differences when comparing WTP measures obtained with linear specifications.”
Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why* (2008, positive): “Design 7 represents the currently predominant method used for generating stated choice experimental designs; the generation of an orthogonal design (see Louviere et al. (2000) Ch5 or Hensher et al. (2005) Ch5).”
Non-attendance to attributes in environmental choice analysis: a latent class specification (2011, methodology): “…specific category of processing strategies or heuristics, namely attribute non-attendance, where a given attribute and its associated level are ignored by a respondent when evaluating alternative attribute packages (see Hensher et al. 2005a, Campbell et al. 2008, Hensher 2008, Scarpa et al. 2009).”
To tax, or not to tax: preferences for climate policy attributes (2012, neutral): “For a more detailed description of the RPL model, see for example, Hensher and Greene (2001), Train (2003), and Hensher et al. (2005).”
Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide (2015, background): “[7], Rose and Bliemer [8], Lancsar and Louviere [9], and Ryan et al.”
Latent class model or mixed logit model? A comparison by transport mode choice data (2009, background): “Concerning the possible positive signs of time-associated parameters, Hess et al. (2005) have noted that ‘a negative measure for Value of Travel Time Savings (VTTS) for a given individual in effect suggests that this individual would be willing to pay for increases in travel-time.”
Farmers' willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution (2013, methodology): “The explanatory power of the model was high with an estimated McFadden Pseudo-R2=0.38 (cf. Hensher et al., 2005).”