Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:59:37 -0600
Reply-To: Sivakumaran Raman <sivakumaran.raman@childrenshc.org>
Sender: "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Sivakumaran Raman <sivakumaran.raman@childrenshc.org>
Subject: Re: Top 10 Combinations
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Cp1252
Hi Victor,
I looked at the documentation (SPSS syntax manual) for SPSS 13.0 and found that the ORTHOPLAN and CONJOINT procedures can be used for conjoint analysis. Does this help?
Siv Raman
===============================================
Sivakumaran Raman, MBBS, MS
Clinical Analyst - Informatics
Children's Hospitals of MN
2900 Centre Pointe Drive,
Mail stop 35-2900A
Roseville, MN 55113.
Phone: 651-855-2055 (office);
612-580-0196 (pager).
Fax: 651-855-2075 (office)
===============================================
>>> LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU 02/26/05 11:02 PM >>>
There are 3 messages totalling 212 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. TOP 10 COMBINATIONS
2. remove from list (2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:36:31 +0100
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Victor_Tarrag=F3?= <vtarrago@acziona.com>
Subject: Re: TOP 10 COMBINATIONS
Dear Richard, I'm so sorry for not being so clear explaining our problem
to help all of you understand it. Thank you for your time. I'll try
again:
Our problem is a Conjoint problem: that means we are dealing with
underlying attributes (as Brand, Price, Quality....) and their levels
(Brand A, Brand B, Brand C..., Price level 1, Price level 2, Price level
3..., Quality level 1, Quality level 2, Quality level 3....).
If you imagine five underlying attributes (x, y, z, n & j), two
attributes with two levels, two with four levels and one with five
levels, you will see that we'll collect 17 variables: one parthworth or
utility value for each of the levels in the problem (x1 x2 y1 y2 z1 z2
z3 z4 n1 n2 n3 n4 j1 j2 j3 j4 j5).
We have conducted the interviews and we have the utilities for each
attribute level, and we've programmed a market simulator using First
Utility, Share off Preference and Purchase Likelihood and invited our
client to play with it, just combining levels and see at their shares.
But our client is in a hurry (as always...!!!) and he asked us if we
could find the 10 top combinations that maximizes the sum of utilities
being combined. That's the reason why we wrote:
>We would like to create new variables, one variable for each possible
>combination of levels of all attributes (in the example would be
>2*2*4*4*5 =320 new variables). The value for each variable should be
>the sum of the levels being combined.
To be clearer we should wrote: "the value for each variable should be
the sum of the utilities of the levels (variables) being combined".
Creating those variables and ranking them comparing the average in the
market we think the problem would be half solved.
In our real problem we have 11 attributes with different number of
levels (4*4*5*2*3*4*5*4*5*4*3), and most of the attributes are
continuous as price (we understand that for those attributes we have the
utility of the price levels tested but in the simulator the price level
could be in any point between the highest and the lowest price levels
tested) and linked with financial data
I'm still being not sure if this time I've been enough detailed
explaining our problem.
Any help, just to know if SPSS can manage with that problem?
Victor Tarragó Sanroma
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Richard Ristow [mailto:wrristow@mindspring.com]
Enviado el: sábado, 26 de febrero de 2005 2:19
Para: Victor Tarrago; SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Asunto: Re: TOP 10 COMBINATIONS
At 03:37 AM 2/22/2005, Victor Tarrago wrote:
>I have the following problem and I don't know if it could be solved
>with SPSS.
I don't think any of us have answered, because we haven't been sure
what to say. To give a quick answer: probably, SPSS is as good a tool
as any for doing what you say you want. But what you say you're doing
seems a very clumsy way to represent, and handle, your data in SPSS, or
any other system.
>Imagine five attributes (x, y, z, n & j): two with two levels, two
>with four levels and one with five levels, each utility level in a
>different variable, so we have the following 17 variables: x1 x2 y1 y2
>z1 z2 z3 z4 n1 n2 n3 n4 j1 j2 j3 j4 j5
If I understand you: either x1 or x2 is 1, but not both;
one, and only one, of z1 z2 z3 z4 is 1; etc.
Normally you'd have *one* variable 'x' for attribute x, with values 1
or 2 (or missing); one variable 'n' for attribute n, with values 1, 2,
3, 4 (or missing); etc. Among other things, it makes, say, FREQUENCIES
much easier to run, and to understand.
Is there a reason you didn't do it that way? Your representation
('dummy-variable coding') can be useful for entering categorical
attributes into regression models, and similar. But many such models
will create the dummies for you; for the others, it's wiser to start
with single variables with multiple levels, and create the multiple
'dummy' variables when you need them.
>We would like to create new variables, one variable for each possible
>combination of levels of all attributes (in the example would be
>2*2*4*4*5 =320 new variables). The value for each variable should be
>the sum of the
>levels being combined.
I assume that the last sentence is not what you mean; that you really
mean, "the value of each variable should be 1 if the variables for the
corresponding levels are 1". If I'm misunderstanding you, this is where
it shows; please respond, if so.
>After those variables had been created (that is, all possible
>combinations), we would like to rank them and identify the top 10
>preferred variables (or combinations) (with the highest mean value).
It looks like you want the most frequently occurring of your 320
combinations. (The 'mean value' of each of your 320 variables would be
the fraction of the time the corresponding combination occurs in your
data.)
If you had, as I've suggested, *one* variable for each of your
attributes x, y, z, n & j, it's pretty easy to count occurrences of all
combinations:
AGGREGATE /OUTFILE=*
/BREAK= X Y Z N J
/OCCUR 'Number of occurrences of combination' = N.
Then, you have one record for each combination (each one that's found
in your data, that is), with "OCCUR" being the number of times the
combination occurs. Sort, list, and report as you like.
You can even do it with your structure, though it's clumsier:
AGGREGATE /OUTFILE=*
/BREAK= x1 x2 y1 y2 z1 z2 z3 z4 n1 n2 n3 n4 j1 j2 j3 j4 j5
/OCCUR 'Number of occurrences of combination' = N.
NOW, here comes the final problem:
>In our case we have 11 attributes with different number of levels
>(4*4*5*2*3*4*5*4*5*4*3)
There, you're probably stuck, and neither SPSS nor any other program
will help you. If I entered the data correctly, that's 2,304,000
different combinations of levels. It makes no sense at all to count
occurrences by level unless you have many, many times that many
observations. And if you did, and did count occurrences by combinations
of levels, how would you understand what you got?
>and most of the attributes are continuous as price.
which simply means, counting by 'cells', or combinations of values,
makes even less sense.
>Any idea would be appreciated.
>Victor Tarragó Sanromà
Can you say more about what you're hoping to learn from your data? And,
maybe, a little more about what the data represents?
Good luck to you,
Richard Ristow
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:34:36 -0500
From: Bill Gottdiener <BILLGTTDNR@cs.com>
Subject: remove from list
Please remove my email from the list. Thank you.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:59:38 -0300
From: Hector Maletta <hmaletta@fibertel.com.ar>
Subject: Re: remove from list
Whom are you writing to, Bill? This list is not moderated, and your message
just got to all list members like me, while you are still subscribed. You
should address the list SERVER, not the list SUBSCRIBERS.
When you subscribed in the first place, you received an automatic message
with instructions (among other things) to unsubscribe. Just write to
LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU and put the following in the body of the message:
UNSUBSCRIBE SPSSX-L Bill Gottdiener
You may also use SIGN OFF instead of UNSUBSCRIBE. The whole process is
automatically handled by the server.
I am copying this to the list, in the probably vain hope that some
prospective unsubscriber sees it and takes notice of the correct way of
unsubscribing discreetly.
Hector
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Bill Gottdiener
> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 9:35 PM
> To: SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: remove from list
>
>
> Please remove my email from the list. Thank you.
>
> Bill
>
------------------------------
End of SPSSX-L Digest - 25 Feb 2005 to 26 Feb 2005 (#2005-56)
*************************************************************
__________________________________
Confidentiality Statement:
This email/fax, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this email/fax is not the intended recipient or his or her agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email/fax is prohibited. If you have received this email/fax in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and deleting this email or destroying this facsimile immediately.
