Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Louviere, Jordan J.
Pihlens, David
Carson, Richard
Year of Publication: 
[Journal:] Journal of Choice Modelling [ISSN:] 1755-5345 [Volume:] 4 [Year:] 2011 [Issue:] 1 [Pages:] 1-8
Disagreement among researchers regarding types of optimal choice experiments is often best seen as resulting from differences in the set of assumptions researchers are willing to make about the underlying data generating process. Much of the current debate may have confused, rather than enlightened applied researchers because the underlying source of the debate lacks transparency. We argue that this debate would be better served if it were much more closely tied to the large existing literature on optimal design of experiments, where many of the issues currently being discussed have long been examined. We further argue that the current debate misses several key issues that are likely to be important to making progress in understanding the role played by experimental designs in applied settings of interest in economics, marketing and transportation research.
choice models
discrete choice experiments
experimental design criteria
Creative Commons License:
Document Type: 
Appears in Collections:
Social Media Mentions:


Files in This Item:
194.05 kB

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.