References
Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000; 320: 1530–3
Lichtenstein S, Slovic P. The construction of preference. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 2006
Slovic P. The construction of preference. Am Psychol 1995; 50: 364–71
Wittink DR, Krishnamurthi L, Reibstein DJ. The effects of differences in the number of attribute levels on conjoint results. Marketing Letters 1989; 2: 113–23
Verlegh PWJ, Schifferstein HNJ, Wittink DR. Range and number-of-levels effects in derived and stated measures of attribute importance. Marketing Letters 2002; 13: 41–52
O’Connor AM, Stacey D, Entwistle V, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003: CD001431
Fraenkel L, Gulanski B, Wittink DR. Patient treatment preferences for osteoporosis. J Rheumatol 2005; 32: 1086–92
Pachur T, Hertwig R. On the psychology of the recognition heuristic: retrieval primacy as a key determinant of its use. J Exp Psychol 2006; 32: 983–1002
Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ. Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. J Exp Psychol 1988; 14: 534–52
Acknowledgements
Dr Fraenkel is supported by the K23 Award AR048826-01 A1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fraenkel, L. Conjoint Analysis at the Individual Patient Level. Patient-Patient-Centered-Outcome-Res 1, 251–253 (2008). https://doi.org/10.2165/1312067-200801040-00005
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/1312067-200801040-00005