离散选择实验中对价数据的价值

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Samson Yaekob Assele , Michel Meulders , Martina Vandebroek
{"title":"离散选择实验中对价数据的价值","authors":"Samson Yaekob Assele ,&nbsp;Michel Meulders ,&nbsp;Martina Vandebroek","doi":"10.1016/j.jocm.2022.100374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In stated preference surveys, data regarding the considered alternatives is sometimes collected prior to the preferred alternative. When the chosen alternative is not in the stated consideration set, the consideration data is inconsistent with the choice data. Several modeling approaches have been used in such situations. Some researchers ignore the consideration data and assume all alternatives are considered. Others only use the consistent choice data and delete the inconsistent observations. The most intricate methods use a latent consideration set formation approach in modeling the choice process. We extend the latent consideration set formation model to incorporate the stated consideration data but allow for inconsistencies in consideration and choice data, and allow for individual-level heterogeneity in the consideration and the choice process. We compare the recovery of the mean population preference parameters of our model with the existing approaches through simulation. The results show that if there is a similar effect of the attributes in both the consideration phase and the choice phase, the mixed logit model is not outperformed by the two-stage models. In contrast, when there is a sufficiently different effect of attributes in the consideration and the choice phase, two-stage models can recover the mean population preference parameters better than the mixed logit model. Furthermore, we can conclude that having stated consideration data barely improves the recovery of the mean preference parameters compared to a latent consideration set choice model that only uses choice data. Finally, we illustrate the models using empirical data about preferences for mobile phones.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46863,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Choice Modelling","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100374"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534522000318/pdfft?md5=708c73d2db9e5d7c46fc6c515bbd2f03&pid=1-s2.0-S1755534522000318-main.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of consideration data in a discrete choice experiment\",\"authors\":\"Samson Yaekob Assele ,&nbsp;Michel Meulders ,&nbsp;Martina Vandebroek\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocm.2022.100374\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In stated preference surveys, data regarding the considered alternatives is sometimes collected prior to the preferred alternative. When the chosen alternative is not in the stated consideration set, the consideration data is inconsistent with the choice data. Several modeling approaches have been used in such situations. Some researchers ignore the consideration data and assume all alternatives are considered. Others only use the consistent choice data and delete the inconsistent observations. The most intricate methods use a latent consideration set formation approach in modeling the choice process. We extend the latent consideration set formation model to incorporate the stated consideration data but allow for inconsistencies in consideration and choice data, and allow for individual-level heterogeneity in the consideration and the choice process. We compare the recovery of the mean population preference parameters of our model with the existing approaches through simulation. The results show that if there is a similar effect of the attributes in both the consideration phase and the choice phase, the mixed logit model is not outperformed by the two-stage models. In contrast, when there is a sufficiently different effect of attributes in the consideration and the choice phase, two-stage models can recover the mean population preference parameters better than the mixed logit model. Furthermore, we can conclude that having stated consideration data barely improves the recovery of the mean preference parameters compared to a latent consideration set choice model that only uses choice data. Finally, we illustrate the models using empirical data about preferences for mobile phones.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"volume\":\"45 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100374\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534522000318/pdfft?md5=708c73d2db9e5d7c46fc6c515bbd2f03&pid=1-s2.0-S1755534522000318-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534522000318\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Choice Modelling","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534522000318","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在声明偏好调查中,有时在首选选项之前收集有关所考虑的选项的数据。当选择的备选方案不在声明的考虑集中时,考虑数据与选择数据不一致。在这种情况下已经使用了几种建模方法。一些研究人员忽略了考虑数据,并假设考虑了所有的替代方案。其他人只使用一致的选择数据,并删除不一致的观察结果。最复杂的方法是在建模选择过程中使用潜在考虑集形成方法。我们扩展了潜在考虑集形成模型,以纳入陈述的考虑数据,但允许考虑和选择数据中的不一致性,并允许考虑和选择过程中的个人层面异质性。通过仿真比较了该模型与现有方法的平均总体偏好参数的恢复情况。结果表明,如果考虑阶段和选择阶段的属性效应相似,则混合logit模型的性能不优于两阶段模型。相比之下,当考虑阶段和选择阶段的属性作用差异较大时,两阶段模型比混合logit模型更能恢复平均总体偏好参数。此外,我们可以得出结论,与仅使用选择数据的潜在考虑集选择模型相比,陈述考虑数据几乎不能提高平均偏好参数的恢复。最后,我们使用手机偏好的实证数据来说明模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The value of consideration data in a discrete choice experiment

In stated preference surveys, data regarding the considered alternatives is sometimes collected prior to the preferred alternative. When the chosen alternative is not in the stated consideration set, the consideration data is inconsistent with the choice data. Several modeling approaches have been used in such situations. Some researchers ignore the consideration data and assume all alternatives are considered. Others only use the consistent choice data and delete the inconsistent observations. The most intricate methods use a latent consideration set formation approach in modeling the choice process. We extend the latent consideration set formation model to incorporate the stated consideration data but allow for inconsistencies in consideration and choice data, and allow for individual-level heterogeneity in the consideration and the choice process. We compare the recovery of the mean population preference parameters of our model with the existing approaches through simulation. The results show that if there is a similar effect of the attributes in both the consideration phase and the choice phase, the mixed logit model is not outperformed by the two-stage models. In contrast, when there is a sufficiently different effect of attributes in the consideration and the choice phase, two-stage models can recover the mean population preference parameters better than the mixed logit model. Furthermore, we can conclude that having stated consideration data barely improves the recovery of the mean preference parameters compared to a latent consideration set choice model that only uses choice data. Finally, we illustrate the models using empirical data about preferences for mobile phones.

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
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
31
×
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