Optimal and near-optimal pairs for the estimation of effects in 2-level choice experiments

By Deborah J. Street, Leonie Burgess. 2004

131 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e70ca74b9a560ffcf98dd6c6c9b7ff89d46b92f6

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A Comparison of Criteria to Design Efficient Choice Experiments (2006, background): “The results for D-optimal paired comparison designs for two-level attributes have been described in the work of Street, Bunch, and Moore (2001) and Street and Burgess (2004) and references therein.”
Constructing Efficient Stated Choice Experimental Designs (2009, background): “As well as maintaining orthogonality, these researchers suggest that SC experiments should be constructed such that attributes common across alternatives should never take the same level over the experiment (see, e.g. Street et al., 2001, 2005; Street and Burgess, 2004; Burgess and Street, 2005).”
Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice (2009, background): “…but not limited to work undertaken by Bliemer et al. (2009), Burgess and Street (2003), Ferrini and Scarpa (2006), Kanninen (2002), Kessels et al. (2006), Sándor and Wedel (2001, 2002, 2005), Rose and Bliemer (2008), Scarpa and Rose (2008), Street and Burgess (2004) and Toner et al. (1999).”
Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why* (2008, unknown): “Because of these radically different starting assumptions our work is to be located in the second paradigm and cannot be compared to similar research carried out within the limited framework of probability balanced designs, that are predicated on researchers’ total ignorance of the values of taste i”
Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations (2010, background): “Street and Burgess (2004) and Street et al. (2005) claim to generate optimal SC designs which are orthogonal.”
Optimal paired comparison designs for first-order interactions (2003, methodology): “This approach has been successfully adopted by Mukerjee et al. (2002) and Graßhoff et al. (2002) for main effect models and by Street and Burgess (2001) in the two-level situation with interactions for full profiles.”
Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study (2007, background): “Recent work by Burgess and Street has tackled the issue of construction of more general designs, such as [67,14,68,15,70] but they are limited to the case of b 1⁄4 0.”
Approximation of bayesian efficiency in experimental choice designs (2008, unknown): “Street et al. make this assumption for analytical reasons, enabling them to locate truly optimal (most efficient) designs.”
What You Don’t Know Might Hurt You: Some Unresolved Issues in the Design and Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments (2006, methodology): “Statistical design theory now exists to optimize the efficiency of designs for generic conditional logit models, and alternative–specific conditional logit models (see e.g., Burgess and Street 2003, 2005a, b; Street and Burgess 2004; Street et al. 2001, 2005, forthcoming).”