# How do you avoid clearly better combinations? (Discrete Choice Conjoint Analysis)

I'm trying to run a Discrete Choice Conjoint Analysis for a financial insurance product. When coming up with the cards for the experiment design how do you avoid combinations that are clearly "better"?

For instance if your attributes are

Benefit Amount - (\$1000, \$2000, \$3000) Benefit Period - (10, 20, 30) Price - (\$5, \$10, \$20)

You could potentially get a combination of

\$1000, 10, \$20

vs

\$3000, 10, \$5

which seems like a no brainer to select the second option. Should I be trying to avoid this, and if so, how?

Theoretically speaking there is no such thing as dominant task. In your example A={$$1000;10;$$20} vs. B={$$3000;10;$$5}, option A seems to dominate B, but what if I don't care about the 1st and 3rd attributes? In that case you ask me to choose between A={10} and B={10}, which option would dominate the other now?