Revisiting reference point formation, gains-losses asymmetry and non-linear sensitivities with an emphasis on attribute specific treatment

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

Volumn 46, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 1673-1689

  Stathopoulos, Amanda ^a   Hess, Stephane ^b  

^a EPFL   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Choice modeling; Commuting; Discrete choice experiment; Gain loss deviations; Non linearity; Reference dependence

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING;

CHOICE MODEL; COMMUTING; DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; GAIN/LOSS DEVIATIONS; NON-LINEARITY; REFERENCE-DEPENDENCE;

DECISION THEORY;

COMMUTING; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TRAVEL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84867113938     PISSN: 09658564     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2012.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Adamowicz W., Boxall P., Williams M., Louviere J. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1998, 80(1):64-75.
2. Bates J., Polak J., Jones P., Cook A. The valuation of reliability for personal travel. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2001, 37(2-3):191-229.
3. Batley R., Dargay J., Wardman M. The impact of lateness and reliability on passenger rail demand. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2011, 47(1):61-72.
4. Ben-Akiva M., Lerman S.R. Discrete Choice Analysis 1985, MIT Press Cambridge, Mass.
5. Bierlaire, M., 2008. Estimation of Discrete Choice Models with BIOGEME 1.8, biogeme.epfl.ch.
6. Box G.E.P., Cox D.R. An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 1964, 26(2):211-252.
7. Daly, A., 2010. Cost Damping in Travel Demand Models: Report of a Study for the Department for Transport. RAND TR-717-DFT.
8. Daly, A., Hess, S., 2011. Simple approaches for random utility modelling with panel data. In: Paper Presented at the 90th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
9. Danielis R., Marcucci E. Attribute cut-offs in freight service selection. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2007, 43(5):506-515.
10. De Borger B., Fosgerau M. The trade-off between money and travel time: a test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Journal of Urban Economics 2008, 64(1):101-115.
11. Delle Site P., Filippi F. Stochastic user equilibrium and value-of-time analysis with reference-dependent route choice. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 2011, 11(2):194-218.
12. DfT, 2009. Values of Time and Operating Costs, Tag Unit 3.5.6, Department for Transport. http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/expert/unit3.5.6.php.
13. Ferrini S., Scarpa R. Designs with a-priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice-experiments: a monte carlo study. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2007, 53(3):342-363.
14. Gunn H.F. Travel budgets-a review of evidence and modeling implications. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 1981, 15(1):7-23.
15. Hensher D.A., Stopher P., Bullock P. Service quality - developing a service quality index in the provision of commercial bus contracts. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2003, 37(6):499-517.
16. Hess S. Treatment of reference alternatives in stated choice surveys for air travel choice behaviour. Journal of Air Transport Management 2008, 14(5):275-279.
17. Hess S., Rose J.M. Should reference alternatives in pivot design sc surveys be treated differently?. Environmental and Resource Economics 2009, 42(3):297-317.
18. Hess S., Rose J.M., Hensher D.A. Asymmetric preference formation in willingness to pay estimates in discrete choice models. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2008, 44(5):847-863.
19. Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L., Thaler R.H. The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1991, 5(1):193-206.
20. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47(2):263-291.
21. Knetsch J.L. Biased valuations, damage assessments, and policy choices: the choice of measure matters. Ecological Economics 2007, 63(4):684-689.
22. Koppelman F. Non-linear utility functions in models of travel choice behaviour. Transportation 1981, 10:127-146.
23. Ko{doubleacute}szegi B., Rabin M. A model of reference-dependent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics 2006, 121:1133-1166.
24. Lanz B., Provins A., Bateman I., Scarpa R., Willis K., Ozdemiroglu E. Investigating willingness to pay-willingness to accept asymmetry in choice experiments. Choice Modelling: The State-of-the-Art and the State-of-Practice 2010, Emerald Publishing, UK. S. Hess, A. Daly (Eds.).
25. Loomes G., Orr S., Sugden R. Taste uncertainty and status quo effects in consumer choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2009, 39(2):113-135.
26. Mabit S., Fosgerau M. Demand for alternative-fuel vehicles when registration taxes are high. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 2011, 16:225-231.
27. Mahmassani H., Caplice C., Walton M. Characteristics of urban commuter behaviour switching propensity and use of information. Transportation Research Record 1990, 1285:57-69.
28. Mandel B., Gaudry M., Rothengatter W. Linear or nonlinear utility function in logit models? The impact on german high-speed rail demand forecasts. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 1994, 28(2):91-101.
29. Masiero L., Hensher D.A. Analyzing loss aversion and diminishing sensitivity in a freight transport stated choice experiment. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2010, 44(5):349-358.
30. Masiero L., Hensher D.A. Shift of reference point and implications on behavioral reaction to gains and losses. Transportation 2011, 38(2):249-271.
31. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics 1974, Academic Press, New York. P. Zarembka (Ed.).
32. McFadden D. Rationality for economists?. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1999, 19(1-3):73-105.
33. Metz D. Saturation of demand for daily travel. Transport Reviews 2010, 30(5):659.
34. Mokhtarian P.L., Chen C. TTB or not TTB, that is the question: a review and analysis of the empirical literature on travel time (and money) budgets. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2004, 38(9/10):643-675.
35. Mokhtarian P.L., Salomon I. How derived is the demand for travel? Some conceptual and measurement considerations. Transportation Research Part A 2001, 35(8):695-719.
36. Páez A., Whalen K. Enjoyment of commute: a comparison of different transportation modes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2010, 44(7):537-549.
37. Redmond L., Mokhtarian P. The positive utility of the commute: modeling ideal commute time and relative desired commute amount. Transportation 2001, 28(2):179-205.
38. Rose J., Bliemer M. Constructing efficient stated choice experimental designs. Transport Reviews 2009, 29:587-617.
39. Rotaris L., Danielis R., Sarman I., Marcucci E. Testing for nonlinearity in the choice of a freight transport service. European Transport 2012, 50:1-22.
40. Scarpa R., Ferrini S., Willis K.G. Performance of error component models for status-quo effects in choice experiments. Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics 2005, 247-274. Springer. R. Scarpa, A. Alberini (Eds.).
41. Schade J., Baum M. Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2007, 41(1):41-48.
42. Schwanen T., Ettema D. Coping with unreliable transportation when collecting children: examining parents' behavior with cumulative prospect theory. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2009, 43:511-525.
43. Senbil M., Kitamura R. Reference points in commuter departure time choice: a prospect theoretic test of alternative decision frames. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Technology, Planning, and Operations 2004, 8(1):19-31.
44. Swait J. A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2001, 35(10):903-928.
45. Tapley, N., 2008. Nonlinearities in Discrete Choice Attributes: A Study of Transport-related Choices. PhD Thesis, The University of Leeds, Institute for Transport Studies.
46. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 1991, 106(4):1039-1061.
47. Verplanken B., Aarts H., Knippenberg A.V. Habit, information acquisition, and the process of making travel mode choices. European Journal of Social Psychology 1997, 27(5):539-560.
48. Zhang J., Timmermans H.J.P., Borgers A.W.J., Wang D. Modeling traveler choice behavior using the concepts of relative utility and relative interest. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2004, 38:215-234.