0
Research Papers: Design Theory and Methodology

The Effect of Product Representation in Visual Conjoint Analysis

[+] Author and Article Information
Brian Sylcott

Department of Engineering,
East Carolina University,
Greenville, NC 27858
e-mail: sylcottb15@ecu.edu

Seth Orsborn

School of Management,
Bucknell University,
Lewisburg, PA 17837
e-mail: seth.orsborn@bucknell.edu

Jonathan Cagan

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Carnegie Mellon University,
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
e-mail: cagan@cmu.edu

Contributed by the Design Theory and Methodology Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received November 12, 2015; final manuscript received July 1, 2016; published online August 30, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Katja Holtta-Otto.

J. Mech. Des 138(10), 101104 (Aug 30, 2016) (8 pages) Paper No: MD-15-1758; doi: 10.1115/1.4034085 History: Received November 12, 2015; Revised July 01, 2016

When most designers set out to develop a new product, they solicit feedback from potential consumers. These data are incorporated into the design process in an effort to more effectively meet customer requirements. Often these data are used to construct a model of consumer preference capable of evaluating candidate designs. Although the mechanics of these models have been extensively studied, there are still some open questions, particularly with respect to models of aesthetic preference. When constructing preference models, simplistic product representations are often favored over high fidelity product models in order to save time and expense. This work investigates how choice of product representation can affect model performance in visual conjoint analysis. Preference models for a single product, a table knife, are derived using three different representation schemes: simple sketches, solid models, and three dimensional (3D)-printed models. Each of these representations is used in a separate conjoint analysis survey. The results from this study show that the choice model based on 3D-printed photopolymer prototypes underperformed. Additionally, consumer responses were inconsistent and potentially contradictory between different representations. Consequently, when using conjoint analysis for product innovation, obtaining a true understanding of consumer preference requires selecting representations based on how accurately they convey the product details in question.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Mugge, R. , and Dahl, D. W. , 2013, “ Seeking the Ideal Level of Design Newness: Consumer Response to Radical and Incremental Product Design,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 30(S1), pp. 34–47. [CrossRef]
Green, P. E. , and Rao, V. R. , 1971, “ Conjoint Measurement for Quantifying Judgmental Data,” J. Mark. Res., 8(3), pp. 355–363. [CrossRef]
Huber, J. , and Zwerina, K. , 1996, “ The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs,” J. Mark. Res., 33(3), pp. 307–317. [CrossRef]
Dahan, E. , and Hauser, J. , 2002, “ The Virtual Customer,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 19(5), pp. 332–353. [CrossRef]
Kim, S.-H. , and Srinivasan, V. , 2009, “ A Conjoint-Hazard Model of the Timing of Buyers' Upgrading to Improved Versions of High-Technology Products,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 26(3), pp. 278–290. [CrossRef]
Pullman, M. E. , Moore, W. L. , and Wardell, D. G. , 2002, “ A Comparison of Quality Function Deployment and Conjoint Analysis in New Product Design,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 19(5), pp. 354–364. [CrossRef]
Green, P. E. , Krieger, A. M. , and Wind, Y. J. , 2001, “ Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects,” Interfaces, 33(3), pp. S56–S73. [CrossRef]
Luo, L. , Kannan, P. K. , Besharati, B. , and Azarm, S. , 2005, “ Design of Robust New Products Under Variability: Marketing Meets Design,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 22(2), pp. 177–192. [CrossRef]
Besharati, B. , Luo, L. , Azarm, S. , and Kannan, P. K. , 2006, “ Multi-Objective Single Product Robust Optimization: An Integrated Design and Marketing Approach,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 128(4), pp. 884–892. [CrossRef]
Olewnik, A. , and Lewis, K. , 2006, “ A Decision Support Framework for Flexible System Design,” J. Eng. Des., 17(1), pp. 75–97. [CrossRef]
Green, P. E. , and Srinivasan, V. , 1978, “ Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook,” J. Consum. Res., 5(2), pp. 103–123. [CrossRef]
Silayoi, P. , and Speece, M. , 2007, “ The Importance of Packaging Attributes: A Conjoint Analysis Approach,” Eur. J. Mark., 41(11/12), pp. 1495–1517. [CrossRef]
Ryan, M. , and Farrar, S. , 2000, “ Using Conjoint Analysis to Elicit Preferences for Health Care,” Br. Med. J., 320(7248), pp. 1530–1533. [CrossRef]
Ryan, M. , Scott, D. A. , Reeves, C. , Bate, A. , Van Teijlingen, E. , Russell, E. M. , Napper, M. , and Robb, C. M. , 2001, “ Eliciting Public Preferences for Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Techniques,” Health Technol. Assess. Winchester Engl., 5(5), pp. 1–186.
Eckman, M. , and Wagner, J. , 1994, “ Judging The Attractiveness of Product Design: The Effect of Visual Attributes and Consumer Characteristics,” Adv. Consum. Res., 21, pp. 560–564.
Jaeger, S. R. , Hedderley, D. , and MacFie, H. J. H. , 2001, “ Methodological Issues in Conjoint Analysis: A Case Study,” Eur. J. Mark., 35(11/12), pp. 1217–1239. [CrossRef]
Page, A. L. , and Rosenbaum, H. F. , 1987, “ Redesigning Product Lines With Conjoint Analysis: How Sunbeam Does It,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 4(2), pp. 120–137. [CrossRef]
Michalek, J. J. , Feinberg, F. M. , and Papalambros, P. Y. , 2005, “ Linking Marketing and Engineering Product Design Decisions Via Analytical Target Cascading*,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 22(1), pp. 42–62. [CrossRef]
Michalek, J. J. , Ebbes, P. , Adigüzel, F. , Feinberg, F. M. , and Papalambros, P. Y. , 2011, “ Enhancing Marketing With Engineering: Optimal Product Line Design for Heterogeneous Markets,” Int. J. Res. Mark., 28(1), pp. 1–12. [CrossRef]
Moore, W. L. , Louviere, J. J. , and Verma, R. , 1999, “ Using Conjoint Analysis to Help Design Product Platforms,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 16(1), pp. 27–39. [CrossRef]
Tseng, M. M. , and Du, X. , 1998, “ Design by Customers for Mass Customization Products,” CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol., 47(1), pp. 103–106. [CrossRef]
Williams, N. , Azarm, S. , and Kannan, P. K. , 2008, “ Engineering Product Design Optimization for Retail Channel Acceptance,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 130(6), p. 061402. [CrossRef]
MacDonald, E. , Lubensky, A. , Sohns, B. , and Papalambros, P. Y. , 2009, “ Product Semantics and Wine Portfolio Optimisation,” Int. J. Prod. Dev., 7(1), pp. 73–98. [CrossRef]
Ferguson, S. , Olewnik, A. , and Cormier, P. , 2011, “ Exploring Marketing to Engineering Information Mapping in Mass Customization: A Presentation of Ideas, Challenges and Resulting Questions,” ASME Paper No. DETC2011-48742.
Grissom, M. D. , Belegundu, A. D. , Rangaswamy, A. , and Koopmann, G. H. , 2005, “ Conjoint-Analysis-Based Multiattribute Optimization: Application in Acoustical Design,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim., 31(1), pp. 8–16. [CrossRef]
Kohli, R. , and Sukumar, R. , 1990, “ Heuristics for Product-Line Design Using Conjoint Analysis,” Manage. Sci., 36(12), pp. 1464–1478. [CrossRef]
Krishnan, V. , and Ulrich, K. T. , 2001, “ Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature,” Manage. Sci., 47(1), pp. 1–21. [CrossRef]
Schumann, J. , Strothotte, T. , Laser, S. , and Raab, A. , 1996, “ Assessing the Effect of Non-Photorealistic Rendered Images in CAD,” SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Common Ground CHI 96, ACM, pp. 35–41.
Wong, Y. Y. , 1992, “ Rough and Ready Prototypes: Lessons from Graphic Design,” SIGCHI Bulletin, ACM, pp. 83–84.
Dahan, E. , and Srinivasan, V. , 2000, “ The Predictive Power of Internet-Based Product Concept Testing Using Visual Depiction and Animation,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 17(2), pp. 99–109. [CrossRef]
Tseng, M. M. , Jiao, J. , and Su, C.-J. , 1998, “ Virtual Prototyping for Customized Product Development,” Integr. Manuf. Syst., 9(6), pp. 334–343. [CrossRef]
Urban, G. L. , Weinberg, B. D. , and Hauser, J. R. , 1996, “ Premarket Forecasting of Really-New Products,” J. Mark., 60(1), pp. 47–60. [CrossRef]
Macomber, B. , and Yang, M. , 2011, “ The Role of Sketch Finish and Style in User Responses to Early Stage Design Concepts,” ASME Paper No. DETC2011-48714.
Kudrowitz, B. M. , and Wallace, D. , 2013, “ Assessing the Quality of Ideas From Prolific, Early-Stage Product Ideation,” J. Eng. Des., 24(2), pp. 120–139. [CrossRef]
Dhillon, B. , Banach, P. , Kocielnik, R. , Emparanza, J. P. , Politis, I. , Raczewska, A. , and Markopoulos, P. , 2011, “ Visual Fidelity of Video Prototypes and User Feedback: A Case Study,” 25th BCS Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 139–144.
Sauer, J. , Seibel, K. , and Rüttinger, B. , 2010, “ The Influence of User Expertise and Prototype Fidelity in Usability Tests,” Appl. Ergon., 41(1), pp. 130–140. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sauer, J. , and Sonderegger, A. , 2009, “ The Influence of Prototype Fidelity and Aaesthetics of Design in Usability Tests: Effects on User Behaviour, Subjective Evaluation and Emotion,” Appl. Ergon., 40(4), pp. 670–677. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Huber, J. , and Holbrook, M. B. , 1981, “ The Use of Real Versus Artificial Stimuli in Research on Visual Esthetic Judgments,” SV—Symbolic Consumer Behavior, E. C. Hirschman and M. B. Holbrook , eds., Association for Consumer Research, New York, pp. 60–68.
Reich, Y. , 1993, “ A Model of Aaesthetic Judgment in Design,” Artif. Intell. Eng., 8(2), pp. 141–153. [CrossRef]
Bloch, P. H. , 1995, “ Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response,” J. Mark., 59(3), pp. 16–29. [CrossRef]
Hoegg, J. , and Alba, J. W. , 2011, “ Seeing Is Believing (Too Much): The Influence of Product Form on Perceptions of Functional Performance,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 28(3), pp. 346–359. [CrossRef]
Venkatesh, A. , and Meamber, L. , 2008, “ The Aaesthetics of Consumption and the Consumer as an Aaesthetic Subject,” Consum. Mark. Cult., 11(1), pp. 45–70. [CrossRef]
Creusen, M. E. H. , and Schoormans, J. P. L. , 2005, “ The Different Roles of Product Appearance in Consumer Choice,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 22(1), pp. 63–81. [CrossRef]
Creusen, M. E. H. , Veryzer, R. W. , and Schoormans, J. P. L. , 2010, “ Product Value Importance and Consumer Preference for Visual Complexity and Symmetry,” Eur. J. Mark., 49(9/10), pp. 1437–1452. [CrossRef]
Crilly, N. , Moultrie, J. , and Clarkson, P. , 2004, “ Seeing Things: Consumer Response to the Visual Domain in Product Design,” Des. Stud., 25(6), pp. 547–577. [CrossRef]
Luchs, M. G. , Brower, J. , and Chitturi, R. , 2012, “ Product Choice and the Importance of Aaesthetic Design Given the Emotion-Laden Trade-Off Between Sustainability and Functional Performance,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 29(6), pp. 903–916. [CrossRef]
Swamy, S. , Orsborn, S. , Michalek, J. , and Cagan, J. , 2007, “ Measurement of Headlight Form Preference Using Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis,” ASME Paper No. DETC2007-35409.
Petiot, J.-F. , and Dagher, A. , 2010, “ Preference-Oriented Form Design: Application to Cars' Headlights,” Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf., 5(1), pp. 17–27. [CrossRef]
Reid, T. N. , Gonzalez, R. D. , and Papalambros, P. Y. , 2010, “ Quantification of Perceived Environmental Friendliness for Vehicle Silhouette Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(10), p. 101010. [CrossRef]
Kelly, J. C. , Maheut, P. , Petiot, J.-F. , and Papalambros, P. Y. , 2011, “ Incorporating User Shape Preference in Engineering Design Optimisation,” J. Eng. Des., 22(9), pp. 627–650. [CrossRef]
Tseng, I. , Cagan, J. , and Kotovsky, K. , 2012, “ Concurrent Optimization of Computationally Learned Stylistic Form and Functional Goals,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 134(11), p. 111006. [CrossRef]
Turner, H. , Orsborn, S. , and Lough, K. G. , 2009, “ Quantifying Product Color Preference in a Utility Function,” Masters thesis, American Society of Engineering Management, Springfield, MO.
Sylcott, B. , Cagan, J. , and Tabibnia, G. , 2013, “ Understanding Consumer Tradeoffs Between Form and Function Through Metaconjoint and Cognitive Neuroscience Analyses,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 135(10), p. 101002. [CrossRef]
Intille, S. , Kukla, C. , and Ma, X. , 2002, “ Eliciting User Preferences Using Image-Based Experience Sampling and Reflection,” CHI02 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computer Systems, ACM Press, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 738–739.
Dijkstra, J. , and Timmermans, H. J. P. , 1998, “ Conjoint Analysis and Virtual Reality—A Review,” 4th Design and Decision Support Systems in Architecture and Urban Planning Conference, Maastricht, The Netherlands, July 26–29.
Tovares, N. , Boatwright, P. , and Cagan, J. , 2014, “ Experiential Conjoint Analysis: An Experience-Based Method for Eliciting, Capturing, and Modeling Consumer Preference,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 136(10), p. 101404. [CrossRef]
Dominique-Ferreira, S. , Boubeta, A. R. , and Mallou, J. V. , 2012, “ Minimizing the Risks of Innovation in Bottled Water Design: An Application of Conjoint Analysis and Focus Group,” Afr. J. Bus. Manage., 6(31), pp. 9096–9104.
Jansen, S. , Boumeester, H. , Coolen, H. , Goetgeluk, R. , and Molin, E. , 2009, “ The Impact of Including Images in a Conjoint Measurement Task: Evidence From Two Small-Scale Studies,” J. Hous. Built Environ., 24(3), pp. 271–297. [CrossRef]
Vriens, M. , Loosschilder, G. H. , Rosbergen, E. , and Wittink, D. R. , 1998, “ Verbal Versus Realistic Pictorial Representations in Conjoint Analysis With Design Attributes,” J. Prod. Innovation Manage., 15(5), pp. 455–467. [CrossRef]
Reid, T. N. , 2013, “ Impact of Product Design Representation on Customer Judgment,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 135(9), p. 091008. [CrossRef]
Sahin, A. , Boe, M. , Terpenny, J. , and Bohn, J. H. , 2007, “ A Study to Understand Perceptual Discrepancies Using Visual Illusions and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA),” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(7), pp. 744–752. [CrossRef]
Gensch, D. , and Recker, W. , 1979, “ The Multinomial, Multiattribute Logit Choice Model,” J. Mark. Res., 16(1), pp. 124–132. [CrossRef]
Train, K. E. , 2003, Discrete Choice Methods With Simulation, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Louviere, J. , and Woodworth, G. , 1983, “ Design and Analysis of Simulated Consumer Choice or Allocation Experiments: An Approach Based on Aggregate Data,” J. Mark. Res., 20(4), pp. 350–367. [CrossRef]
Orme, B. K. , Alpert, M. I. , and Christensen, E. , 1997, “ Assessing the Validity of Conjoint Analysis-Continued,” Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings, Sequim, WA, pp. 209–226.
Hyndman, R. J. , and Koehler, A. B. , 2006, “ Another Look at Measures of Forecast Accuracy,” Int. J. Forecasting, 22(4), pp. 679–688. [CrossRef]
Sylcott, B. , Michalek, J. J. , and Cagan, J. , 2015, “ Towards Understanding the Role of Interaction Effects in Visual Conjoint Analysis,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 137(9), p. 094503. [CrossRef]
Hagerty, M. , 1986, “ The Cost of Simplifying Preference Models,” Mark. Sci., 5(4), pp. 298–319. [CrossRef]
Hauser, J. R. , and Rao, V. R. , 2004, “ Conjoint Analysis, Related Modeling, and Applications,” Marketing Research and Modeling: Progress and Prospects, Springer, New York, pp. 141–168.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Photograph of prototype trial

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Screenshot of prototype trial

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Experimental procedure example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Mean participant choice consistency

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Screenshot of sketch trial

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Screenshot of CAD trial

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

End attribute levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Edge attribute levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Slope attribute levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Perspective view of knife model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Typical table knife

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Mean pairwise representation consistency

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

End attribute part-worth values for each representation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Slope attribute part-worth values for each representation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Edge attribute part-worth values for each representation

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In