二元选择实验中的条件独立性

IF 1.3 2区 经济学 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Nathaniel T. Wilcox
{"title":"二元选择实验中的条件独立性","authors":"Nathaniel T. Wilcox","doi":"10.1007/s11166-024-09431-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Experimental and behavioral economists, as well as psychologists, commonly assume conditional independence of choices when constructing likelihood functions for structural estimation of choice functions. I test this assumption using data from a new experiment designed for this purpose. Within the limits of the experiment’s identifying restriction and designed power to detect deviations from conditional independence, conditional independence is not rejected. In naturally occurring data, concerns about violations of conditional independence are certainly proper and well-taken (for well-known reasons). However, when an experimenter employs the particular experimental mechanisms and designs used here, the findings suggest that conditional independence is an acceptable assumption for analyzing data so generated.</p>","PeriodicalId":48066,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conditional independence in a binary choice experiment\",\"authors\":\"Nathaniel T. Wilcox\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11166-024-09431-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Experimental and behavioral economists, as well as psychologists, commonly assume conditional independence of choices when constructing likelihood functions for structural estimation of choice functions. I test this assumption using data from a new experiment designed for this purpose. Within the limits of the experiment’s identifying restriction and designed power to detect deviations from conditional independence, conditional independence is not rejected. In naturally occurring data, concerns about violations of conditional independence are certainly proper and well-taken (for well-known reasons). However, when an experimenter employs the particular experimental mechanisms and designs used here, the findings suggest that conditional independence is an acceptable assumption for analyzing data so generated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09431-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09431-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实验经济学家、行为经济学家以及心理学家在构建用于对选择函数进行结构性估计的似然函数时,通常会假设选择的条件独立性。我利用为此目的而设计的一项新实验的数据对这一假设进行了检验。在实验的识别限制和检测条件独立性偏差的设计能力范围内,条件独立性并没有被否定。在自然发生的数据中,对违反条件独立性的担忧当然是正确的,也是有道理的(原因众所周知)。然而,当实验者采用这里所使用的特定实验机制和设计时,研究结果表明,在分析这样产生的数据时,条件独立性是一个可以接受的假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Conditional independence in a binary choice experiment

Conditional independence in a binary choice experiment

Experimental and behavioral economists, as well as psychologists, commonly assume conditional independence of choices when constructing likelihood functions for structural estimation of choice functions. I test this assumption using data from a new experiment designed for this purpose. Within the limits of the experiment’s identifying restriction and designed power to detect deviations from conditional independence, conditional independence is not rejected. In naturally occurring data, concerns about violations of conditional independence are certainly proper and well-taken (for well-known reasons). However, when an experimenter employs the particular experimental mechanisms and designs used here, the findings suggest that conditional independence is an acceptable assumption for analyzing data so generated.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
10.60%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (JRU) welcomes original empirical, experimental, and theoretical manuscripts dealing with the analysis of risk-bearing behavior and decision making under uncertainty. The topics covered in the journal include, but are not limited to, decision theory and the economics of uncertainty, experimental investigations of behavior under uncertainty, empirical studies of real world risk-taking behavior, behavioral models of choice under uncertainty, and risk and public policy. Review papers are welcome. The JRU does not publish finance or behavioral finance research, game theory, note length work, or papers that treat Likert-type scales as having cardinal significance. An important aim of the JRU is to encourage interdisciplinary communication and interaction between researchers in the area of risk and uncertainty. Authors are expected to provide introductory discussions which set forth the nature of their research and the interpretation and implications of their findings in a manner accessible to knowledgeable researchers in other disciplines. Officially cited as: J Risk Uncertain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信