Interpreting HB model results for an alternative-specific design

Question

Hello, everyone,

I have some difficulty interpreting my HB model results with an alternative-specific design and would appreciate your help.

I have an attribute, let’s call it “brand”. And brand comes with the levels A, B and C. Furthermore, brand B always appears with one of the three eco-labels X, Y and Z. The other brands A and C don’t have a label.

Brand A has a sustainability score of 0%, B has 50% and C 100%. However, this information is hidden in the CBC tasks and is only accessible to the respondents via mouse-over.

Now, my HB model results look like this:

Brand A: -78
Brand B: 50
Brand C: 28

Eco-label X: -1
Eco-label Y: -6
Eco-label Z: 7

Now the question is whether the respondents were deceived by the eco-labels, i.e. the respondents did not recognize that brand C has the highest degree of sustainability despite the lack of a label?

It is obvious that even though Brand C has the highest sustainability score, brand B is preferred. My guess now is that I cannot separate the effects of brand B and eco-label and only the following conclusion is allowed: “If a respondent chooses brand B, it is of secondary importance which label is displayed.”
However, I cannot say that eco-labels – due to their low average importance - generally play a subordinate role.

Is that correct?

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Answer 1

Nico,

You're right that you cannot separate Brand B from Eco-label - Brand B was never shown without an Eco-label, so we simply don't know what it's utility would be without any Eco-label, nor do we know what Eco-labels might be worth separately from Brand B.

Certainly the Eco-labels play some role in the choice of Brand B (because the levels have non-zero utilities) but it does look like they play less of a role than the other factors, whatever they are, that contribute to the differences in brand utilities.

Comments

Hi, Keith,

thanks for your quick response. A, B and C are not well-known brands, but fictitious brands, which in turn suggest some degree of sustainability:

Brand A (“Standard”): -78
Brand B (“Eco Basic”): 50
Brand C (“Eco Sustainable”): 28

Eco-label X: -1
Eco-label Y: -6
Eco-label Z: 7

The question now is whether the respondents prefer "Eco Basic + any Eco-label" over "Eco Sustainable + no label", although the latter is more sustainable. However, they only get this information - as already written - via a mouseover.

As A, B and C are not well-known brands or product names, I suspect that some of the utility currently attributed to B actually comes from the eco-labels. Otherwise, in my opinion, the preference for "Eco Basic" cannot be explained, unless the respondents do not like sustainable products.

Would you agree?

---

Yes, that explanation makes sense to me.  If brands A, B and C are not otherwise very informative, then other intangibles that might be associated with them probably are NOT the reason for differences in utilities.