Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nygren, T. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Limitations of Additive Conjoint Scaling Procedures: Detecting Nonadditivity When Additivity Is Known to Be Violated

Thomas E. Nygren

Ohio State University

Two sets of three-outcome gambles were construc ted to vary factorially along the factors Amount to Lose, Amount to Win, Probability of Losing, and Probability of Winning. Single stimulus ratings of attractiveness and risk were obtained for each of the constructed gambles from 19 subjects. In addi tion, paired comparison strength of preference and difference in risk judgments were obtained for a subset of these gambles. Two additive conjoint scal ing procedures, Carroll's (1972) MDPREF and Johnson's (1975) NMRG, were used to generate pre dicted paired comparison preference and risk judg ments from the single stimulus ratings for each subject. These predictions were then compared with the observed paired comparison judgments. Results indicated that although the goodness-of-fit mea sures associated with each of the scaling models in dicated that the subject's data were being fit very well by the additive models, additivity among the payoff and probability factors was clearly violated. A procedure for detecting nonadditivity is outlined and illustrated with the data. The limitations of using these additive conjoint scaling procedures as predictive techniques when additivity is violated are shown and their implications are discussed.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 4, No. 3, 367-383 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168000400308


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
C. A. Nickerson and G. H. McClelland
Scaling Distortion in Numerical Conjoint Measurement
Applied Psychological Measurement, April 1, 1984; 8(2): 183 - 198.
[Abstract]