The Conjoint Cookbook

A practical, interdisciplinary guide to designing, fielding, and analyzing choice experiments with R

Authors
Affiliations

Georgia State University

George Washington University

Published

August 26, 2025

blah blah blah intro stuff here

Conjoint experiments or forced choice experiments (where respondents are shown randomly shuffled combinations of features and are asked to choose their most preferred option, and then they repeat that over and over again) have long been popular in marketing, and since 2014 they’ve become popular in polisci, public policy, and social science more broadly. But even though the actual approach is used the same way across disciplines, the estimands that disciplines are interested in are completely different.

In marketing, they care about consumer preferences and market shares, so they use conjoint data to build simulations of hypothetical product profiles, ultimately measuring market preferences.

In polisci, they care about casual effects—e.g. how much does the favorability of a political candidate change if they are a lawyer vs. not a lawyer. In this world, analysts don’t look at aggregate market preferences, but look at the exact causal levers and effects associated with different experimental conditions.

The two worlds know nothing about each other.

Main point of book—bridging the two worlds of polisci-style causal effects (AMCEs and marginal means and AFCPs) with marketing/econ-style preference and utility descriptions + providing hands on code examples of the methods, from basic OLS from polisci to hierarchical Bayesian multinomial logit in marketing

Running examples

Product packaging

Study 5 from Sokolova, Krishna, and Döring (2023) (and data from ResearchBox)

Features/Attributes Levels
Price $2, $3, $4
Packaging Plastic + paper, Plastic + sticker
Flavor Nuts, Chocolate
TipExample conjoint question/task

If these two granola bars were your only options, which would you choose?

Price $3 $4
Packaging Plastic + paper Plastic + sticker
Flavor Chocolate chips Nuts
Choice

Political candidates

From Hainmueller, Hopkins, and Yamamoto (2014)

Features/Attributes Levels
Military service Served, Did not serve
Religion None, Jewish, Catholic, Mainline protestant, Evangelical protestant, Mormon
College No BA, Baptist college, Community college, State university, Small college, Ivy League university
Profession Business owner, Lawyer, Doctor, High school teacher, Farmer, Car dealer
Gender Male, Female
Income $32,000; $54,000; $65,000; $92,000; $210,000; $5,100,000
Race/Ethnicity White, Native American, Black, Hispanic, Caucasian, Asian American
Age 36, 45, 52, 60, 68, 75
TipExample conjoint survey question

If you had to choose between them, which of these two candidates would you vote for?

Candidate 1 Candidate 2
Military service Did not serve Served
Religion None Mormon
College State university Ivy League university
Profession Lawyer Business owner
Gender Female Female
Income $54,000 $92,000
Race/Ethnicity White Asian American
Age 45 68
Choice

Minivans

From chapter 13 in Chapman and Feit (2019)

Features/Attributes Levels
Passengers 6, 7, 8
Cargo area 2 feet, 3 feet
Engine Gas, electric, hybrid
Price $30,000; $35,000; $40,000
TipExample survey question
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Passengers 7 8 6
Cargo area 3 feet 3 feet 2 feet
Engine Electric Gas Hybrid
Price $40,000 $40,000 $30,000
Choice

References

Chapman, Chris, and Elea McDonnell Feit. 2019. R For Marketing Research and Analytics. 2nd ed. Use R! Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14316-9.
Hainmueller, Jens, Daniel J. Hopkins, and Teppei Yamamoto. 2014. “Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments.” Political Analysis 22 (1): 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt024.
Sokolova, Tatiana, Aradhna Krishna, and Tim Döring. 2023. “Paper Meets Plastic: The Perceived Environmental Friendliness of Product Packaging.” Journal of Consumer Research 50 (3): 468–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad008.