DCE or conjoint? Conjoint.ly uses discrete choice experimentation, which is sometimes referred to as choice-based conjoint. DCE is a more robust technique consistent with random utility theory and has been proven to simulate customers’ actual behaviour in the marketplace (Louviere, Flynn & Carson, 2010 cover this topic in detail). However, the output on relative importance of attributes and value by level is aligned to the output from conjoint analysis (partworth analysis).
Experimental design. Conjoint.ly uses the attributes and levels you specify to create a (fractional factorial) choice design, optimising balance, overlap, and other characteristics. Our algorithm does not specifically attempt to maximise D-efficiency, but it tends to produce D-efficient designs. It tends to produce designs of resolution IV or V (as such, it does support measurement of two-way interactions, even though they are not used in our modelling at this stage). In most cases, the number of choice sets is excessive for one respondent and the experiment is split into multiple blocks (often between five and ten). We do not support individualised designs (i.e., every respondent has their own block). Each choice set consists of several product construct alternatives and, by default, one “do not buy” alternative. To review the experimental design for your experiment, in your design set-up page, please go to “Advanced options”, then click “Export experimental design”.
Minimum sample size. Conjoint.ly automatically recommends a minimum sample size. In most cases, it is between 50 and 300 responses. In our calculations, we use a proprietary formula that takes into account the number of attributes, levels, and other experimental settings.
Relative importance of attributes and value of levels. Conjoint.ly estimates a hierarchical bayesian (HB) multinomial logit model of choice using responses deemed valid. The value (partworth) of each level reflects how strongly that level sways the decision to buy the construct. Attributes with large variations in the sway factor are deemed more important. Specifically, we calculate attribute importance and level value scores (partworth utilities) by taking coefficients from the estimated model and linearly transforming them so that:
Marginal willingness to pay. For experiments where one of the attributes is price, Conjoint.ly estimates a separate model with price as a numerical variable. We also perform checks for appropriateness of calculation of the measure, taking into account both the experimental set-up and the received responses (for example, limiting MWTP calculation in cases where there is non-linearity in price). We use the concept of “Market Value of Attribute Improvement” (MVAI), but unlike in the original paper we do not use the closed-form formula, but rather find the values numerically.
Share of preference simulation. Share of preference simulation is performed using individual coefficients from the estimated HB multinomial logit model. Two models for calculating market shares are available:
Ranked list of product constructs. Conjoint.ly forms the complete list of product constructs using all possible combinations of levels and ranks them based on a score computed from the relative level value scores (partworths).
Responses on Conjoint.ly are checked for signs of fraudulent or inattentive behaviour. They are automatically marked as low quality if the following signs are present:
When you set up your study, you can specify a separate redirect for these respondents under “Advanced settings”. If you are using our panel respondents, you do not pay for low quality answers.
The raw data collected in all experiments are available in the Excel sheets, which makes it possible to do additional analysis on the data outside of Conjoint.ly. In particular, the “Raw data” sheet will contain the following key tables:
The values set_seq_order and alternative_seq_order are not necessarily in the order in which each respondent sees these, because the rendering of questions is randomised for each respondent, and the rendering of alternatives is randomised for each question.