Analysis of cardinal and ordinal assumptions in conjoint analysis

R. Wes Harrison, Jeffrey Gillespie, Deacue Fields

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Scopus citations


Of twenty-three agricultural economics conjoint analyses conducted between 1990 and 2001, seventeen used interval-rating scales, with estimation procedures varying widely. This study tests cardinality assumptions in conjoint analysis when interval-rating scales are used, and tests whether the ordered probit or two-limit tobit model is the most valid. Results indicate that cardinality assumptions are invalid, but estimates of the underlying utility scale for the two models do not differ. Thus, while the ordered probit model is theoretically more appealing, the two-limit tobit model may be more useful in practice, especially in cases with limited degrees of freedom, such as with individual-level conjoint models.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)238-252
Number of pages15
JournalAgricultural and Resource Economics Review
Issue number2
StatePublished - Oct 2005


  • Cardinality
  • Conjoint analysis
  • Ordered probit
  • Two-limit probit

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agronomy and Crop Science
  • Economics and Econometrics


Dive into the research topics of 'Analysis of cardinal and ordinal assumptions in conjoint analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this