Accommodating taste heterogeneity in railway passenger choice models based on internet booking data

Journal of Choice Modelling

Volumn 6, Issue , 2013, Pages 1-16

  Hetrakul, Pratt ^a   Cirillo, Cinzia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; Latent class; Mixed logit; Railway; Revenue management

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881389431     PISSN: 17555345     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2013.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bastin, F., 2011. Another Mixed Logit Estimation Tool (AMLET) Reference Manual. http://amletslashbin.net/(accessed 08.07.11).
2. Berry J., 1999. Why web sites fall short-According to CSC study, top management and IT are out of synch. Presented at Internet Week, vol. 765, pp. 27-28 (May 17).
3. Bhat, C.R., 1998. Accommodating variations in responsiveness to level-of-service variables in travel mode choice modeling. Transportation Research Part A 32 (7), 495-507.
4. Bhat, C.R., 2000. Incorporating observed and unobserved heterogeneity in urban work mode choice modeling. Transportation Science 34 (2), 228-238.
5. Burke, R.R., 1997. Do you see what J see? The future of virtual shopping. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (4), 352-360.
6. Carrier, E., 2008. Modeling the Choice of an Airline Itinerary and Fare Product using Booking and Seat Availability Data (Ph.D. Dissertation). Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
7. Espino, R., Martin, J.C., Roman, C., 2008. Analyzing the effect of preference heterogeneity on willingness to pay for improving service quality in an airline choice context Transportation Research E 44, 593-606.
8. Garrow, L.A., 2010. Discrete Choice Modeling and Air Travel Demand: Theory and Applications. Ashgate Publishing, UIC
9. Greene, W.H., Hensher, D.A., 2003. A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit Transportation Research B 37, 681-698.
10. Horowitz, J., 1982. An evaluation of the usefulness of two standard goodness-of fit indicators for comparing non-nested random utility models. Transportation Research Record 874, 19-25.
11. Jin, X., 2007. Toward Time-of-Day Modeling for Long Distance Trips (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.
12. McFadden, D., Train, K., 2000. Mixed MNL models of discrete response. Journal of Applied Econometrics 15, 447-470.
13. Miller, TE., 1996. Segmenting the internet American demographics 18 (7), 48-52.
14. Peterson, R.A., Balsubramanian, S., Bronnenberg, B.J., 1997. Exploring the implications of the internet for consumer marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (4), 329-346.
15. Shen, J., 2009. Latent class model or mixed logit model? A comparison by transport mode choice data. Applied Economics 41(22), 2915-2924.
16. Smith, W.R., 1956. Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. Journal of Marketing Vol. 21, 3-8.
17. Teichert T., Shehu, E., von Wartburg, I., 2008. Customer segmentation revisited: the case of the airline industry. Transportation Research Part A 42, 227-242.
18. Vermunt, J.IC, Magdison, J., 2005. Technical Guide for Latent Gold Choice 4.0: Basic and Advanced. Statistical Innovations Inc, Belmont, MA2005.
19. Warburg, V., Bhat, C., Adler, T., 2006. Modeling demographic and unobserved heterogeneity in air passengers' sensitivity to service attributes in itinerary choice. Transportation Research Record 1951, 7-16.
20. Wen, C.H., Lai, S.C., 2010. Latent class models of international air carrier choice. Transportation Research Part E 46, 211-221.
21. Whelan, G., Toner, J., Shires, J., Batley, J.R., Wardmand, M., Nash, C., 2008. Optimal fare regulations for Britain's railways. Transportation Research Part E 44, 807-8 19.