David Gal of the University of Illinois discusses the methodological limitations of conjoint analysis for assessing consumer preferences and estimating damages in litigation settings.
Conjoint analysis is a survey-based methodology used for measuring consumer preferences. During the last decade, conjoint analysis has been used in the context of litigation to assess preferences for product features in intellectual property disputes and to assess damages in product liability and false advertising class actions. However, despite its popularity, the assumptions and performance of conjoint analysis have been subject to relatively little scrutiny.
In this article, author David Gal of the University of Illinois introduces conjoint analysis and describes some of its foundational weaknesses that cast doubt on the utility and reliability of the use of conjoint in litigation, providing examples from litigation settings along the way.
This article was originally published by Westlaw in March 2022.
The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of Cornerstone Research.
