The paper provides a discussion and an empirical assessment
of alternate/parallel form reliability in the context of conjoint
analysis. The empirical findings from the investigation indicate
that the successive evaluative preference judgments gathered
via alternate conjoint forms are far more consistent than one
would expect by chance. In addition, empirical support for the
equivalency of the two most commonly used conjoint forms is
provided. These findings should be reassuring to users and
advocates of conjoint analysis, and as a result, conjoint
analysis should now be used with greater confidence by advertising
and marketing researchers.