Have an idea?

Visit Sawtooth Software Feedback to share your ideas on how we can improve our products.

What's better: ACBC or Partial Profile?

Sometimes, clients want a conjoint study with (too) many attributes.
To deal with many attributes one could do Partial Profile; or one could do ACBC.
I was wondering if Sawtooth has done any research on comparing Partial Profile with ACBC - in situations with many attributes.

Thank you very much!
asked May 27, 2014 by Dimitri Bronze (645 points)
retagged Jun 29, 2014 by Walter Williams

1 Answer

+1 vote

I'm not aware of research comparing the two head-to-head.  As co-inventor of partial profile conjoint I am probably a bit biased but here is a comparison of the two approaches:

PP is a much faster interview for respondents, it dramatically reduces response error compared to CBC and it can handle many more attributes without overwhelming respondents.  It indirectly encourages deeper processing of preferences because a given attribute (including those that are most important) only appears in a minority of choice sets, allowing other attributes a chance to exert influence.

ACBC is probably better for handling price than is PP and it directly encourages respondents to process preferences more deeply by trying to detect, and then ask respondents about, potential non-compensatory effects.  ACBC may also prevent some of the "flattening out" of utilities that we sometimes see with PP models.   

I hope this helps.
answered May 27, 2014 by Keith Chrzan Platinum Sawtooth Software, Inc. (55,425 points)
I agree with Keith's statements.  By "Flattening Out" he means differences in derived importances between most important and least important attributes in ACBC tend to be greater than in PP.
Partial profile experimental designs are a terrific contribution to the field Keith.  Thank you!