Rank-Ordered Data

  • Hubert Gatignon


When the criterion variable is defined on an ordinal scale, the typical analyses based on correlations or covariances are not appropriate. The methods described in Chap. 6 do not use the ordered nature of the data and, consequently, do not use all the information available. In this chapter, we present methodologies that take into account the ordinal property of the dependent variable.


Ordinary Little Square Conjoint Analysis Cumulative Density Function Ordinary Little Square Estimation Order Probit Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Basic Technical Readings

  1. Amemiya, T. (1985). Advanced econometrics. Cambridge, MS: Harvard University Press [Chap. 9].Google Scholar
  2. Cattin, P., Gelfand, A. E., & Danes, J. (1983). A simple Bayesian procedure for estimation in a conjoint model. Journal of Marketing Research, 20(1), 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Green, P. E., & Rao, V. R. (1971). Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental data. Journal of Marketing Research, 8(3), 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Louviere, J. J. (1988). Conjoint analysis modeling of stated preferences. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 22(1), 93–119.Google Scholar
  5. McKelvey, R. D., & Zavoina, W. (1975). A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 4, 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Application Readings

  1. Beggs, S., Cardell, S., & Hausman, J. (1981). Assessing the potential demand for electric cars. Journal of Econometrics, 16, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowman, D., & Gatignon, H. (1995). Determinants of competitor response time to a New product introduction. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(1), 42–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bunch, D. S., & Smiley, R. (1992). Who deters entry? evidence on the Use of strategic entry deterrents. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 74(3), 509–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chu, W., & Anderson, E. (1992). Capturing ordinal properties of categorical dependent variables: a review with applications to modes of foreign entry and choice of industrial sales force. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 9, 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Green, P. E. (1984). Hybrid models for conjoint analysis: an expository review. Journal of Marketing Research, 21(2), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Green, P. E., Krieger, A. M., & Agarwal, M. K. (1991). Adaptive conjoint analysis: some caveats and suggestions. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(2), 215–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5(2), 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint analysis in marketing: New developments with applications for research and practice. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Green, P. E., & Wind, Y. (1975). A New Way to measure consumers' judgements (pp. 107–117). July-August: Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
  10. Jain, D. C., Muller, E., et al. (1999). Pricing patterns of cellular phones and phonecalls: a segment-level analysis. Management Science, 45(2), 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mahajan, V., Green, P. E., & Goldberg, S. M. (1982). A conjoint model for measuring self- and cross-price/demand relationships. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), 334–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Page, A. L., & Rosenbaum, H. F. (1987). Redesigning product lines with conjoint analysis: How sunbeam does it. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4, 120–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Priem, R. L. (1992). An application of metric conjoint analysis for the evaluation of top managers' individual strategic decision making processes: a research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rangaswami, A., & Richard Shell, G. (1997). Using computers to realize joint gains in negociations: toward an "Electronic Bargaining Table". Management Science, 43(8), 1147–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Srinivasan, V., & Chan Su Park. (1997). Surprising robustness of the self-explicated approach to customer preference structure measurement. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(2), 286–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wind, J., Green, P. E., Shifflet, D., & Scarbrough, M. (1989). Courtyard by Marriott: designing a hotel facility with consumer-based marketing models. Interfaces, 19(1), 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hubert Gatignon
    • 1
  1. 1.INSEADFontainebleau CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations