首页> 外文期刊>Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology >Comparison of four common data collection techniques to elicit preferences
【24h】

Comparison of four common data collection techniques to elicit preferences

机译:四种常见数据收集技术的比较引发偏好

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

We compare four common data collection techniques to elicit preferences: the rating of items, the ranking of items, the partitioning of a given amount of points among items, and a reduced form of the technique for comparing items in pairs. University students were randomly assigned a questionnaire employing one of the four techniques. All questionnaires incorporated the same collection of items. The data collected with the four techniques were converted into analogous preference matrices, and analyzed with the Bradley-Terry model. The techniques were evaluated with respect to the fit to the model, the precision and reliability of the item estimates, and the consistency among the produced item sequences. The rating, ranking and budget partitioning techniques performed similarly, whereas the reduced pair comparisons technique performed a little worse. The item sequence produced by the rating technique was very close to the sequence obtained averaging over the three other techniques.
机译:我们比较四种常见的数据收集技术来引发偏好:项目的评级,项目的排名,项目中给定量的点的分区,以及用于成对比较项目的技术的缩小形式。 大学生随机分配了一个采用四种技术之一的调查问卷。 所有调查问卷都包含相同的物品集合。 用四种技术收集的数据被转换为类似的偏好矩阵,并用布拉德利 - 特里模型分析。 对于拟合模型,项目估计的精度和可靠性以及所生产的物品序列之间的一致性评估该技术。 同样地执行评级,排名和预算分区技术,而减少的对比较技术表现较差。 由额定技术产生的物品序列非常接近于在三种其他技术上获得的平均序列。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号