[R-sig-DCM] Weighting in DCMs

Wirth, Ralph (GfK SE) ralph.wirth at gfk.com
Fri Feb 25 14:10:15 CET 2011


Hmm, maybe I am not critical enough, but I don't see a big problem in weighting respondents' utilities in order to simulate realistic preference shares (of course given that it's a proper weighting, i.e. that the effective sample size, which always decreases though weighting is still large enough)?!

I think that theoretically, the weights should already be taken into account during the HB-estimation (i.e. use weighted means and the respective covariance matrices as moments for the first stage prior), but as far as I remember, John Howell (ex Sawtooth) has found out that this doesn't make a big difference in the end. I think this has been published in one of the last Sawtooth Conference proceedings.





-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: r-sig-dcm-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-sig-dcm-bounces at r-project.org] Im Auftrag von Dimitri Liakhovitski
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. Februar 2011 18:32
An: R DCM List
Betreff: [R-sig-DCM] Weighting in DCMs

Everyone, hi!

it's not an R-related question - but it'd be great to hear your arguments.
Sometimes we run a DCM (HB) for a sample and then the clients say: Would you
please weight the results - our sample has too many women.

I know there is a number of arguments against doing this. Which ones did you
find working best with your clients?

Thank you!
Dimitri

        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

_______________________________________________
R-SIG-DCM mailing list
R-SIG-DCM at r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-dcm


GfK SE, Nuremberg, Germany, commercial register Nuremberg HRB 25014; Management Board: Professor Dr. Klaus L. Wübbenhorst (CEO), Pamela Knapp (CFO), Dr. Gerhard Hausruckinger, Petra Heinlein, Debra A. Pruent, Wilhelm R. Wessels; Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Dr. Arno Mahlert
This email and any attachments may contain confidential ...{{dropped:4}}



More information about the R-SIG-DCM mailing list