A comparison of two normative choice formulations: The Shapley Value versus the weighted additive rule

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/288952
Title:
A comparison of two normative choice formulations: The Shapley Value versus the weighted additive rule
Author:
Michaels, Jon
Issue Date:
1999
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Abstract:
The Shapley Value, a cooperative game theory model, is adapted for use as a category preference measure in marketing. The model collects overall ratings for bundles of choices. These are then decomposed into individual preference scores by estimating the average marginal contribution of each choice over all applicable bundles. The technique provides a holistic rating alternative to constant sum for estimating preferences. It is applicable where choices are disparate, incommensurable, and apportionment difficult, where the questioning might gain from indirection or obfuscation, or where unambiguous attribute sets are not available. It provides a metric in circumstances when respondents are reluctant to choose between alternatives, but when one can elicit ratings (that do not appear to yield preference orderings). The Shapley Value is compared to weighted additive and indirect share preference models based upon proximity to a constant sum standard. Proximity is measured by two distance metrics: a Euclidean distance and a directional cosine (correlation) measure. Statistical testing demonstrates that Shapley Value is significantly closer to constant sum than either weighted additive or indirect share in two categories--fast food restaurants and actors in Seinfeld. Testing was conducted in a computer-aided laboratory setting. Subjects were 93 undergraduate business majors enrolled in an introductory marketing course. They were compensated for their participation with both a monetary and course credit incentives.
Type:
text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Keywords:
Business Administration, Marketing.; Economics, Theory.
Degree Name:
Ph.D.
Degree Level:
doctoral
Degree Program:
Graduate College; Industrial Management
Degree Grantor:
University of Arizona
Advisor:
Heckler, Susan E.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.titleA comparison of two normative choice formulations: The Shapley Value versus the weighted additive ruleen_US
dc.creatorMichaels, Jonen_US
dc.contributor.authorMichaels, Jonen_US
dc.date.issued1999en_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe Shapley Value, a cooperative game theory model, is adapted for use as a category preference measure in marketing. The model collects overall ratings for bundles of choices. These are then decomposed into individual preference scores by estimating the average marginal contribution of each choice over all applicable bundles. The technique provides a holistic rating alternative to constant sum for estimating preferences. It is applicable where choices are disparate, incommensurable, and apportionment difficult, where the questioning might gain from indirection or obfuscation, or where unambiguous attribute sets are not available. It provides a metric in circumstances when respondents are reluctant to choose between alternatives, but when one can elicit ratings (that do not appear to yield preference orderings). The Shapley Value is compared to weighted additive and indirect share preference models based upon proximity to a constant sum standard. Proximity is measured by two distance metrics: a Euclidean distance and a directional cosine (correlation) measure. Statistical testing demonstrates that Shapley Value is significantly closer to constant sum than either weighted additive or indirect share in two categories--fast food restaurants and actors in Seinfeld. Testing was conducted in a computer-aided laboratory setting. Subjects were 93 undergraduate business majors enrolled in an introductory marketing course. They were compensated for their participation with both a monetary and course credit incentives.en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeDissertation-Reproduction (electronic)en_US
dc.subjectBusiness Administration, Marketing.en_US
dc.subjectEconomics, Theory.en_US
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineIndustrial Managementen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.contributor.advisorHeckler, Susan E.en_US
dc.identifier.proquest9927442en_US
dc.identifier.bibrecord.b39559063en_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.