Skew and attribute non-attendance within the Bayesian mixed logit model

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 446-461

  Balcombe, Kelvin ^a   Burton, Michael ^b   Rigby, Dan ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF READING   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Attribute non attendance; Bayesian; Choice experiment; Mixed logit; Skew

Indexed keywords

ATTRIBUTE NON-ATTENDANCE; BAYESIAN; CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; MIXED LOGIT; SKEW;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; HETEROGENEITY; LOGIT ANALYSIS; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; SKEWNESS;

EID: 80955151556     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: 10960449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2011.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Balcombe K., Chalak A., Fraser I. Model selection for the mixed logit with Bayesian estimation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 2009, 57(2):226-237.
2. Burton M., Rigby D. Hurdle and latent class approaches to non-participation in choice models. Environ. Res. Econ. 2009, 42:279-295.
3. J. Cameron, J.R. de Shazo, Differential attention to attributes in utility theoretic choice models, Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Oregon, 2008.
4. Campbell D., Hutchinson W.G., Scarpa R. Incorporating discontinuous preferences into the analysis of discrete choice experiments. Environ. Res. Econ. 2008, 41(3):401-417.
5. D. Campbell, V. Lorimer, Accommodating attribute processing strategies in stated choice analysis: do respondents do what they say they do? in: Paper Presented at EAERE Conference, Amsterdam, June 2009.
6. D. Campbell, S. Hess, R. Scarpa, J.M. Rose, Accommodating coefficient outliers in discrete choice modelling: a comparison of discrete and continuous mixing approaches in choice modelling the state-of-the-art and the state-of-practice, in: Proceedings from the Inaugural International Choice Modelling Conference, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2010.
7. D. Campbell, S. Hess, Outlying sensitivities in discrete choice data: consequences and remedies? in: Paper presented at Fourth World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, Montreal, 2010.
8. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Engineering better Australian seafood and beef, CSIRO Food Futures Flagship, 2008. http://www.csiro.au/science/psp8.
9. Gelfand A., Dey D. Bayesian model choice: asymptotics and exact calculations. J. Roy. Statistical Society Ser. B 1994, 56:501-504.
10. Gilbride T.J., Allenby G.M., Brazell J.D. Models for heterogeneous variable selection. J. Marketing Res. 2006, 43:420-430.
11. Hensher D.A., Rose J.M., Greene W.H. The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes. Transportation 2005, 32:203-222.
12. Hensher D.A., Greene W.H. Non-attendance and dual processing of common-metric attributes in choice analysis: a latent class specification. Empirical Econ. 2009, 39(2):413-426.
13. Hensher D.A., Rose J.M. Simplifying choice through attribute preservation or non-attendance: implications for willingness to pay. Transp. Res.: Part E 2009, 45(4):583-590.
14. D.A. Hensher, Attribute processing, heuristics, and preference construction in choice analysis in discrete choice modelling: a comparison of discrete and continuous mixing approaches in choice modelling the state-of-the-art and the state-of-practice, in: Proceedings from the Inaugural International Choice Modelling Conference, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2010.
15. S. Hess, J. Rose, A latent class approach to modelling heterogeneous information processing strategies in SP studies, in: Paper Presented at the Oslo Workshop on Valuation Methods in Transport Planning, Oslo, 2007.
16. Hess S., Hensher D.A. Using conditioning on observed choices to retrieve individual-specific attribute processing strategies. Transp. Res. B 2010, 44:781-790.
17. Rigby D., Balcombe K., Burton M. Mixed logit model performance and distributional assumptions: preferences and GM foods. Environ. Res. Econ. 2009, 42(3):279-295.
18. Saelensminde K. Inconsistent choices in stated choice data-use of the logit scaling approach to handle resulting variance increases. Transportation 2001, 28:269-296.
19. Scarpa R., Thiene M., Marangon F. Using flexible taste distributions to value collective reputation for environmentally friendly production methods. Can. J. Agr. Econ. 2008, 56:145-162.
20. Scarpa R., Rose J.M. Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why. Australian J. Agr. Resource Econ. 2008, 52(3):253-282.
21. Scarpa R., Gilbride T.J., Campbell D., Hensher D.A. Modelling attribute non-attendance in choice experiments for rural landscape valuation. Europ. Rev. Agr. Econ. 2009, 36(2):151-174.
22. Scarpa R., Thiene M., Hensher D.A. Monitoring choice task attribute attendance in non-market valuation of multiple park management services: does it matter?. Land Econ. 2010, 86(4):817-839.
23. Street D., Burgess L.B. The Construction of Optimal Stated Choice Experiments: Theory and Methods 2007, John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
24. Train K. Discrete Choice Methods and Simulation 2003, Cambridge University Press.
25. Train K., Sonnier G. Mixed logit with bounded distributions of partworths. Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental Resource Economics 2005, Kluwer Academic Publishing. R. Scarpa, A. Alberini (Eds.).