TY  - JOUR
T1  - AN EVALUATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS’ APARTMENT PREFERENCES: A REAL WORLD STUDY IN A NEWLY URBANIZED CITY
TT  - AN EVALUATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS’ APARTMENT PREFERENCES: A REAL WORLD STUDY IN A NEWLY URBANIZED CITY
AU  - Zortuk, Mahmut
AU  - Koç, Eylem
AU  - Burhan, Hasan
PY  - 2015
DA  - January
JF  - Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal
PB  - Istanbul University
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 1308-7215
SP  - 1
EP  - 20
VL  - 0
IS  - 21
LA  - en
AB  - This paper presents an evaluation of higher education students’ apartment preferences with respect to multiple criteria. In order to find out the importance rankings of these criteria and determine the optimum apartment option conjoint analysis method is used. Location, renter, room, price, floor, age were identified as attributes. 343 students participated in the study by rating sixteen apartment profiles with different combinations of above mentioned six attributes. According to the results, number of rooms, price and location attributes have the greatest influence on students’ decisions and these are followed by age, floor and renter attributes. Additionally the optimum apartment option is a central, 0-5 years aged, 3 bedroom and 1 living room apartment, rented by the householder with a price of 300-400 Turkish Liras. As an evaluation of a real world decision problem, the outcomes will help real estate agencies, householders and constructing firms in probable future decisions. Researchers who will perform a study in this field will be able take advantage of the results as well. disadvantages. While some of the students prefer to study in their hometowns, others leave their family homes for HE
KW  - Conjoint analysis
KW  - Apartment preferences
KW  - Housing
KW  - Higher education students
KW  - Urbanization
KW  - Decision-making
CR  - Abdul Hamid b. Hj. M. I., Norhaya bt. K., Seah L. H., (2008) ‘Buyer's conjoint
CR  - preference for the attributes of condominium properties’, International Real Estate Research Symposium. Putra World Trade Center, Kuala Lumpur, 28-30 April.
CR  - http://eprints.utm.my/5220/1/Conjoint_for_Condo.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2014.
CR  - Acosta, L.A., Enano Jr., N.H., Magcale-Macandog, D.B., Engay, K.G., Herrer,
CR  - M.N.Q., Nicopior, O.B..S., Sumilang, M.I.V., Eugenioe, J.M.A., Lucht, W., (2013). How
CR  - sustainable is bioenergy production in the Philippines? A conjoint analysis of knowledge and
CR  - opinions of people with different typologies. Applied Energy, 102, 241–253. Adhikari, A., Basu, A., Raj, S.p., (2013). Pricing of experience products under
CR  - consumer heterogeneity. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33, 6-18.
CR  - Altun, A. & Gök, B., (2010). Determining in-service training programs’ characteristics
CR  - given to teachers by conjoint analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1709- 1714. Arlı, E., (2013). Barınma yerinin üniversite öğrencilerinin kişisel ve sosyal gelişim ve
CR  - akademik başarı üzerindeki etkilerinin odak grup görüşmesi ile incelenmesi. Yükseköğretim
CR  - ve Bilim Dergisi, 3 (2), 173-178.
CR  - Borgers, A., Snellen, D., Poelman, J., Timmermans, H. (2008). Preferences for car
CR  - restrained residential areas. Journal of Urban Design, 13, 257–267. Borgers, A., Vosters, C., (2011). Assessing preferences for mega shopping
CR  - centres: A conjoint measurement approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
CR  - Services, 18(4), 322-332.
CR  - Chakrabarty, B.K., (2001). Concepts, principles, techniques and education. Cities, 18(5), 331–345.
CR  - De Jong, P., Rouwendal, J., Van Hattum, P., Brouwer, A., (2012). Housing
CR  - preferences of an ageing population: Investigation in the diversity among Dutch older adults.
CR  - http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=123055. Accessed 10 May 2014. Demir, A., Pala, A., Baytekin, H., (2006). Ziraat fakülteleri öğrencilerinin sosyal
CR  - yapıları, eğilimleri ve sorunları üzerinde bir araştırma. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (3), pp. 259-267.
CR  - Earnhart, D., (2002). Combining revealed and stated data to examine housing decisions
CR  - Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5 (2), pp. 225-234. Fisher K., Orkin, F., Frazser, C., (2010). Utilizing conjoint analysis to explicate
CR  - health care decision making by emergency department nurses: A feasibility study.
CR  - Applied Nursing Research, 23 (1), pp. 30-35. Green, P.E., Rao, V.R., (1971). Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental
CR  - data, Journal of Marketing Research, 8, pp. 355-363. Gustafsson, A., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., (2007). ‘Conjoint Analysis as an Instrument
CR  - of Market Research Practice’ In: Gustafsson et al. eds. Conjoint Measurement Methods and
CR  - Applications, New York: Sage. Hassanain, M. A., (2008). On the performance evaluation of sustainable student
CR  - housing facilities. Journal of Facilities Management, 6 (3), pp. 212-225.
CR  - Jansen, S.J.T., Coolen, Henny C.C.H., Goetgeluk, R.W., (2011). ‘Introduction’. In:
CR  - Jansen et al. eds. The Measurement and Analysis of Housing Preference and Choice, New York: Springer.
CR  - Katoshevski, R., Timmermans, H., (2001). Using conjoint analysis to formulate user
CR  - centred guidelines for urban design: The example of new residential development in Israel.
CR  - Journal of Urban Design, 6, pp. 37–53. Koç, M., Polat, Ü., (2006). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Ruh Sağlığı, Uluslararası İnsan
CR  - Bilimleri Dergisi, 3 (2), pp. 1-22.
CR  - Kuzmanovic, M., Savic, G., Gusavac, B.A., Nikolic, D.M., Panic, B., (2012). A
CR  - conjoint-based approach to student evaluations of teaching performance. Expert Systems with
CR  - Applications, 40, pp. 4083–4089. Kuzmanovic, M., Martic, M., (2012). An approach to competitive product line design
CR  - using conjoint data. Expert Systems with Applications, 39 (8), pp. 7262–7269. Kuzmanovic, M., Vujosevic, M., Martic, M., (2012). Using conjoint analysis to elicit
CR  - patients’ preferences for public primary care service in Serbia. HealthMED, 6 (2), pp. 496– 504. Lee, J. K., Lee, J. H., Sohn, S. Y., (2009). Designing a business model for the content
CR  - service of portable multimedia players, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, pp. 6735–6739. Liu, J., Deng, W., Zhang, B., (2011). Conjoint analysis based transit service quality
CR  - research. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 11 (4), pp. 97-102. Louviere, J. J., and Henley, D. H., (1977). An empirical analysis of student apartment
CR  - selection decisions. Geographical Analysis, 9, 130–141. Luce, R. D. & Tukey, J.W., (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new scale
CR  - type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1(1), 1–27. Michalek, J., Feinberg, F.M., Papalambros, P.Y., (2005). Linking marketing and
CR  - engineering product design decisions via analytic target cascading. Journal of Product
CR  - Innovation Management, 22 (1), pp. 42–62.
CR  - Molin, E.J.E, (2011), ‘Conjoint Analysis’. In: Jansen et al. eds. The Measurementand
CR  - Analysis of Housing Preference and Choice, New York: Springer.
CR  - Molin, E. J. E. and Oppewal, H., Timmermans, H. J. P., (2000). A comparison of full
CR  - profile and hierarchical information conjoint methods in modeling group preferences.
CR  - Marketing Letters, 11, pp. 165–172. Moore, W.L., (2004). A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based
CR  - conjoint analysis models. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, pp.299–312.
CR  - Natter M., Feurstein, M., (2002). Real world performance of choice
CR  - based conjoint models. European Journal of Operational Research, 137 (2), pp.448-458.
CR  - North, E.J. & de Vos, R.B., (2002). The use of conjoint analysis to determine
CR  - consumer buying preferences: A literature review, Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer
CR  - Sciences, 30, pp. 32–39.
CR  - Opoku, R. A. and Abdul-Muhmin, A. G., (2010). Housing preferences and attribute
CR  - importance among low-income consumers in Saudi Arabia. Habitat International, 34, 219- 227. Oppewal, H., Louviere, J.J., Timmermans, H.J.P., (2000).
CR  - Modifying conjoint methods to model managers' reactions to business environmental
CR  - trends: An application to modeling retailer reactions to sales trends. Journal of Business
CR  - Research, 50 (3), pp.245-257. Orzechowski, M. A., Arentze, T. A., Borgers, A. W. J., Timmermans, H. J. P.,
CR  - (2005). Alternate methods of conjoint analysis for estimating housing preference
CR  - functions: Effects of presentation style. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment,
CR  - 20, pp.349–362. Rao, V.R. & Sattler, H., (2011). ‘Measurement of price effects with conjoint analysis:
CR  - Separating informational and allocative effects of price’. In: Jansen et al. eds. The
CR  - Measurementand Analysis of Housing Preference and Choice, New York: Springer. Sattler, H., Hensel-Börner, S., (2007). ‘A comparison of conjoint measurement with self-explicated approaches’ In: Gustafsson et al. eds. Conjoint Measurement Methods and
CR  - Applications, New York: Sage. Sohn, S. Y. & Ju, Y. H., (2010). Conjoint analysis for recruiting high quality students
CR  - for college education. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(5), 3777-3783. Tayyaran, M.R., Kahn, A.M., Anderson, D.A., (2003). Impact of telecommuting and
CR  - intelligent transportation systems on residential location choice. Transportation Planning and
CR  - Technology, 26 (2), pp. 171–193. Theysohn, S., Klein, K., Völckner, F., Spann, M., (2013). Dual effect-based market
CR  - segmentation and price optimization. Journal of Business Research, 66 (4), pp.480-488. Timmermans, H., Molin, E. and Noortwijk, L.V., (1994). Housing choice processes:
CR  - Stated versus revealed modeling approaches, Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built
CR  - Environment, 9, pp. 215-227. Tu, Y. & Goldfinch, J., (1996). A two-stage housing choice forecasting model. Urban
CR  - Studies, 33, pp.517–537. Turkish Statistical Institute (2012). Turkish Statistical Institute. Available at:
CR  - http://www.tuik.gov.tr/[Accessed 25 June 2014]. Venkatesh V., Chan, F.K.Y., Thong, J.Y.L., (2012). Designing e-government services:
CR  - Key service attributes and citizens’ preference structures, Journal of Operations Management,
CR  - 30, pp.116–133 Vetschera, R., Weitzl, W., Wolfsteiner, E., (2014). Implausible alternatives in eliciting
CR  - multi-attribute value functions. European Journal of Operational Research, 234, pp.221–230. Wang, D. & Li, S.M., (2004). Housing preferences in a transitional housing system:
CR  - The case of Beijing, China, Environment and Planning A, 36, pp.69–87. Ween, B., Kristoffersen, D.T., Hamilton, G.A., Olsen D.R., (2005). Image quality
CR  - preferences among radiographers and radiologists. A conjoint analysis. Radiography, 11 (3), pp.191-197. Wittink, D.R., Huber, J.C., Zandan, P., Johnson, R.M., (1992). The Number of Levels
CR  - Effect in Conjoint: Where Does It Come From, and Can It Be Eliminated?. Available at:
CR  - http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/support/technical-papers/general-conjoint-analysis/the
CR  - number-of-levels-effect-in-conjoint-where-does-it-come-from-and-can-it-be-eliminated-1992
CR  - [Accessed: 5 May 2014]. Wu, W. Y., Liao, Y. K., Chatwuthikrai, A., (2014). Applying conjoint analysis to
CR  - evaluate consumer preferences toward subcompact cars. Expert Systems with Applications,
CR  - 41, pp.2782–2792. Yano, C., Dobson, G., (1998). Profit-optimizing product line design, selection and
CR  - pricing with manufacturing cost consideration. In: Ho et al. eds. Product Variety
CR  - Management: Research Advances, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Zafer Development Agency (2011). Zafer Development Agency. Available at:
CR  - http://www.zafer.org.tr/[Accessed 16 June 2014]. Zardari, N.H. & Cordery, I., (2007). ‘Modelling water allocation decisions: a conjoint
CR  - analysis approach’, International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Christchurch, New
CR  - Zealand, 10-13 December.
UR  - https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/iuekois/issue//112144
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/95016
ER  -