Seda Erdem
TitleCited byYear
Using best–worst scaling to explore perceptions of relative responsibility for ensuring food safety
S Erdem, D Rigby, A Wossink
Food Policy 37 (6), 661-670, 2012
582012
Accounting for attribute‐level non‐attendance in a health choice experiment: does it matter?
S Erdem, D Campbell, AR Hole
Health economics 24 (7), 773-789, 2015
292015
Position bias in best-worst scaling surveys: a case study on trust in institutions
D Campbell, S Erdem
American Journal of Agricultural Economics 97 (2), 526-545, 2015
262015
Prioritising health service innovation investments using public preferences: a discrete choice experiment
S Erdem, C Thompson
BMC health services research 14 (1), 360, 2014
212014
Investigating heterogeneity in the characterization of risks using best worst scaling
S Erdem, D Rigby
Risk Analysis 33 (9), 1728-1748, 2013
202013
Elimination and selection by aspects in health choice experiments: prioritising health service innovations
S Erdem, D Campbell, C Thompson
Journal of health economics 38, 10-22, 2014
172014
Consumers' preferences for nanotechnology in food packaging: a discrete choice experiment
S Erdem
Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (2), 259-279, 2015
122015
Preferences for public involvement in health service decisions: a comparison between best-worst scaling and trio-wise stated preference elicitation techniques
S Erdem, D Campbell
The European Journal of Health Economics 18 (9), 1107-1123, 2017
52017
Using a Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit Consumers’ WTP for Health Risk Reductions Achieved By Nanotechnology in the UK
S Erdem, D Rigby
32011
Who is most responsible for ensuring the meat we eat is safe?
S Erdem, D Rigby, A Wossink
32010
Including opt-out options in discrete choice experiments: issues to consider
D Campbell, S Erdem
The Patient-Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 12 (1), 1-14, 2019
12019
Who do UK consumers trust for information about nanotechnology?
S Erdem
Food Policy 77, 133-142, 2018
12018
Attribute non-attendance in discrete-choice-experimenten
L Bölter, A Sadler, AC Mühlbacher
Gesundheitsökonomie & Qualitätsmanagement 22 (03), 135-143, 2017
12017
The effect of front-of-pack nutrition labelling formats on consumers’ food choices and decision-making: merging discrete choice experiment with an eye tracking experiment
S Erdem, T McCarthy
12016
Addressing elimination and selection by aspects decision rules in discrete choice experiments: does it matter?
S Erdem, D Campbell, C Thompson
12014
Including opt-out options in discrete choice experiments: issues to consider (Forthcoming/Available Online)
D Campbell, S Erdem
Patient, 2018
2018
Trust in Institutions About Nanotechnology: An Application of The Best-Worst Scaling Technique
S ERDEM
FOOD SAFETY, PERCEPTIONS AND PREFERENCES: EMPIRICAL STUDIES ON RISKS …, 2018
2018
A Means to An End? The Value of Health Risk Reductions Achieved by Nanotechnology
S ERDEM
FOOD SAFETY, PERCEPTIONS AND PREFERENCES: EMPIRICAL STUDIES ON RISKS …, 2018
2018
Nanotechnology could make our food tastier and healthier–but can we stomach it?
S Erdem
The Conversation, 2016
2016
A new method for preference elicitation: a comparison of trio-wise and best-worst scaling
S Erdem, D Campbell
International Choice Modelling Conference 2015, 2015
2015
The system can't perform the operation now. Try again later.
Articles 1–20