The implications on willingness to pay of a stochastic treatment of attribute processing in stated choice studies

Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 73-89

  Hensher, David A ^a   Rose, John ^a   Bertoia, Tony ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Attribute processing; Stated choice designs; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

TRAVEL TIME;

ATTRIBUTE PROCESSING; COPING STRATEGIES; DISCRETE CHOICE MODELS; PROCESSING STRATEGIES; STATED CHOICE; STATED CHOICE DESIGN; STATED CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; STOCHASTIC TREATMENT; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; LOGIT ANALYSIS; STOCHASTICITY; TRAVEL TIME; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA; NEW SOUTH WALES; SYDNEY;

EID: 33845394805     PISSN: 13665545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tre.2005.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Bliemer, M.C., Rose, J.M., 2005. Efficient Designs for Alternative Specific Choice Experiments, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, University of Sydney, February.
2. Brown M.B., and Forsythe A.B. Robust tests for equality of variances. Journal of American Statistical Association 69 (1974) 264-267
3. Bunch, D.S., Louviere, Jordan J., Anderson, Donald A., 1996. A comparison of experimental design strategies for choice-based conjoint analysis with generic-attribute multinomial logit models. Working paper. Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis.
4. DePalma A., Meyers G.M., and Papageorgiou Y.Y. Rational choice under an imperfect ability to choose. American Economic Review 84 (1994) 419-440
5. DeShazo, J.R., Fermo, G., 2004. Implications of rationally-adaptive pre-choice behaviour for the design and estimation of choice models, working paper. School of Public Policy and Social Research, University of Califormia at Los Angeles, August.
6. Diederich A. MDFT account of decision making under time pressure. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 10 (2003) 157-166
7. Drolet A., and Luce M.F. The rationalizing effects of cognitive load on emotion-based trade-off avoidance. Journal of Consumer Research 31 (2004) 63-77
8. Gilboa I., Schmeidler D., and Wakker P. Utility in case-based decision theory. Journal of Economic Theory 105 (2002) 483-502
9. González-Vallejo C. Making trade-offs: a probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. Psychological Review 109 (2002) 137-155
10. Hensher D.A. Accounting for stated choice design dimensionality in willingness to pay for travel time savings. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 38 2 (2004) 425-446
11. Hensher, D.A., 2005. Imposing a Globally Signed Condition on a Generalised Parameterisation of Attributes in Choice Models to Produce Sign Compliant Willingness to Pay Distributions, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, University of Sydney, February.
12. Hensher, D.A., in press. Revealing differences in behavioural response due to the dimensionality of stated choice designs: an initial assessment. Environmental and Resource Economics, Invited Paper.
13. Hensher D.A., and Greene W.H. Mixed logit models: state of practice. Transportation 30 2 (2003) 133-176
14. Hensher D.A., Rose J., and Greene W. The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes. Transportation 32 2 (2005) 203-222
15. Hensher D.A., Rose J.M., and Greene W.H. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer (2005), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
16. Huber J., and Zwerina K. The importance of utility balance and efficient choice designs. Journal of Marketing Research 33 3 (1996) 307-317
17. Kahnemann D., and Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 47 2 (1979) 263-291
18. Kanninen B.J. Optimal design for multinomial choice experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 39 2 (2002) 214-217
19. Kuhfeld W.F., Tobias R.D., and Garratt M. Efficient experimental design with marketing research applications. Journal of Marketing Research 21 4 (1994) 545-557
20. Lazari A.G., and Anderson D.A. Designs of discrete choice experiments for estimating both attribute and availability cross effects. Journal of Marketing Research 31 3 (1994) 375-383
21. Louviere J.J., and Timmermans H.J.P. Hierarchical information integration applied to residential choice behaviour. Geographical Analysis 22 (1990) 127-145
22. Louviere J.J., Hensher D.A., and Swait J.F. Stated Choice Methods and Analysis (2000), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
23. Oppewal H., Louviere J.J., and Timmermans H.J.P. Modeling hierarchical information integration processes with integrated conjoint choice experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 31 (1994) 92-105
24. Payne J.W., Bettman J.R., and Johnson E.J. Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 14 (1988) 534-552
25. Payne J.W., Bettman J.R., Coupey E., and Johnson E.J. A constructive process view of decision making: multiple strategies in judgment and choice. Acta Psychologica 80 (1992) 107-141
26. Sælensminde K. The impact of choice inconsistencies in stated choice studies. Environmental and Resource Economics 23 4 (1994) 403-420
27. Sandor Z., and Michel W. Designing conjoint choice experiments using managers' prior beliefs. Journal of Marketing Research 38 4 (2001) 430-444
28. Siegel S., and Castellan N. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (1988), McGraw-Hill, New York
29. Slovic P. The construction of preference. American Psychologist 50 (1995) 364-371
30. Starmer C. Developments in non-expected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Journal of Economic Literature XXXVIII (2000) 332-382
31. Stewart N., Chater N., Stott H.P., and Reimers S. Prospect relativity: how choice options influence decision under risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 132 (2003) 23-46
32. Svenson O. Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: a frame of reference for the study of pre-and post-decision processes. Acta Psychologica 80 (1992) 143-168
33. Swait J., and Adamowicz W. The influence of task complexity on consumer choice: a latent class model of decision strategy switching. Journal of Consumer Research 28 (2001) 135-148
34. Thurstone L.L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review 23 (1927) 273-286
35. Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
36. Wang D., Li J., and Timmermans H.J.P. Reducing respondent burden, information processing and incomprehensibility in stated preference surveys: principles and properties of paired conjoint analysis. Transportation Research Record 1768 (2001) 71-78