Techn. Universiẗat, Diss., 2004--Berlin.

Zugl.: Magdeburg, Univ., Diss., 2009

Zugl.: Halle (Saale), Univ., Diss., 2006 / Hergestellt on demand

Zugl.: Aachen, Techn. Hochsch., Diss., 2009

Thesis (doctoral)--Eberhard-Karls-Universität zu Tübingen, 1997.

In this dissertation a new method is proposed to estimate willingness-to-pay (WTP). The method works as an additional interview scene appended to conjoint analysis and it is named throughout this dissertation as the Price Estimation scene (PE scene). In the preceding conjoint analysis price is not included as an attribute. Instead the exchange rate between conjoint utilities and willingness-to-pay is estimated in the PE scene. This is achieved by the use of product stimuli in addition to price scales that are adapted for each respondent in the interview reflecting his or her previously estimated part-worth utilities. In the PE scene the respondents are presented with a sequence of product choices with assigned prices and indicate whether they would actually purchase each of the presented product profiles. The PE scene is a method to estimate willingness-to-pay at an individual level based only on each respondent's provided information. Shortcomings of existing approaches that use conjoint analysis, such as a missing choice rule as well as problems that arise when price is included as an attribute are overcome. The PE scene was tested in an empirical investigation in which the WTPs of the customers of the Nokia online shop in Germany for different product bundles were estimated. (author's abstract)

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / In the last two decades, ambivalence has emerged as one of the primary concerns of attitude researchers. The acknowledgement that individuals can simultaneously evaluate an attitude object as both positive and negative has challenged a number of the status quos of the attitude literature. This thesis utilises an unfolding approach to investigate the implications of ambivalence for the conceptualisation of attitudes and their measurement. Firstly, the assumption that ambivalence is at odds with the bipolar understanding of attitudes was investigated. The results suggested that ambivalence is consistent with bipolarity, whereby ambivalent attitudes are located at the centre of the bipolar dimension. Secondly, attitude scales for the abortion, euthanasia and Aboriginal Australians issues were constructed to reflect this bipolar understanding. The fit of these statements to Coombs’ (1964) unidimensional unfolding theory provided evidence that ambivalence is also consistent with the quantitative conceptualisation of attitudes. Together these results provided further validation of the unfolding approach to attitude measurement. These models alleviate many of the problems faced by the ubiquitous method of summated ratings, including the assessment of ambivalent evaluations. Finally, these scales were used to investigate the latent structure of attitudes and its relationship with meta-psychological judgements of ambivalence. The conclusions drawn from these analyses were limited by a number of issues, highlighting the importance of rigorously considering measurement issues for all attitude parameters. Nonetheless, they presented preliminary validation of these scales’ ability to measure ambivalent evaluations and suggested a systematic relationship between proximity to the centre of the evaluative dimension and metapsychological ambivalence. Overall, it is concluded that a number of assumptions regarding the implications of ambivalence are misplaced and the proposed solutions are even more troublesome. Suggestions for future research are made, particularly with respect to differentiating between ambivalent, indifferent and uncertain evaluative states. Furthermore, attitude researchers are encouraged to discard their operationalist biases in order to engage with the measurement issues illuminated throughout this thesis. This is necessary to account for the complexity of the attitude construct, which ambivalence is testament to.

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / In the last two decades, ambivalence has emerged as one of the primary concerns of attitude researchers. The acknowledgement that individuals can simultaneously evaluate an attitude object as both positive and negative has challenged a number of the status quos of the attitude literature. This thesis utilises an unfolding approach to investigate the implications of ambivalence for the conceptualisation of attitudes and their measurement. Firstly, the assumption that ambivalence is at odds with the bipolar understanding of attitudes was investigated. The results suggested that ambivalence is consistent with bipolarity, whereby ambivalent attitudes are located at the centre of the bipolar dimension. Secondly, attitude scales for the abortion, euthanasia and Aboriginal Australians issues were constructed to reflect this bipolar understanding. The fit of these statements to Coombs’ (1964) unidimensional unfolding theory provided evidence that ambivalence is also consistent with the quantitative conceptualisation of attitudes. Together these results provided further validation of the unfolding approach to attitude measurement. These models alleviate many of the problems faced by the ubiquitous method of summated ratings, including the assessment of ambivalent evaluations. Finally, these scales were used to investigate the latent structure of attitudes and its relationship with meta-psychological judgements of ambivalence. The conclusions drawn from these analyses were limited by a number of issues, highlighting the importance of rigorously considering measurement issues for all attitude parameters. Nonetheless, they presented preliminary validation of these scales’ ability to measure ambivalent evaluations and suggested a systematic relationship between proximity to the centre of the evaluative dimension and metapsychological ambivalence. Overall, it is concluded that a number of assumptions regarding the implications of ambivalence are misplaced and the proposed solutions are even more troublesome. Suggestions for future research are made, particularly with respect to differentiating between ambivalent, indifferent and uncertain evaluative states. Furthermore, attitude researchers are encouraged to discard their operationalist biases in order to engage with the measurement issues illuminated throughout this thesis. This is necessary to account for the complexity of the attitude construct, which ambivalence is testament to.

Univ., Diss.--Bayreuth, 2003.

Zugl.: München, Universiẗat, Fak. für Betriebswirtschaft, Diss., 2001.