Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 35, Issue 7, 2017, Pages 697-716

  Lancsar, Emily ^a   Fiebig, Denzil G ^b   Hole, Arne Risa ^c  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENT; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOFTWARE; STUDY DESIGN; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; PATIENT PREFERENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PATIENT PREFERENCE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 85016932318     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0506-4     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
2. de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ. 2012;21(2):145–72.
3. Clark MD, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob EW. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(9):883–902.
4. Viney R, Lancsar E, Louviere J. Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2002;2(4):319–26.
5. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(8):661–77.
6. Bridges J, Hauber A, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser L, Regier D, et al. A checklist for conjoint analysis applications in health: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Taskforce. Value Health. 2011;14(4):403–13.
7. Coast J, Horrocks S. Developing attributes and levels for discrete choice experiments using qualitative methods. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12(1):25–30.
8. Johnson FR, Lancsar E, Marshall D, Kilambi V, Mühlbacher A, Regier DA, et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design good research practices task force. Value Health. 2013;16(1):3–13.
9. Lancsar E, Swait J. Reconceptualising the external validity of discrete choice experiments. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(10):951–65.
10. Hauber B, Gonzalez J, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, Prior T, Marshall D, Cunningham C, et al. Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choie experiments: a report of the ISPOR conjinta analysis good research practice task force. Value Health. 2016;19:300–15.
11. Ghijben P, Lancsar E, Zavarsek S. Preferences for oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a best–best discrete choice experiment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(11):1115–27.
12. Dillman DA. Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method. New York: Wiley; 2000.
13. Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, Rasinski K. The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
14. Lancsar E, Louviere J, Donaldson C, Currie G, Burgess L. Best worst discrete choice experiments in health: methods and an application. Soc Sci Med. 2013;76:74–82.
15. Louviere JJ, Flynn TN, Marley A. Best–worst scaling: theory, methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2015.
16. Bartels R, Fiebig DG, van Soest A. Consumers and experts: an econometric analysis of the demand for water heaters. Empir Econ. 2006;31(2):369–91.
17. King MT, Hall J, Lancsar E, Fiebig D, Hossain I, Louviere J, et al. Patient preferences for managing asthma: results from a discrete choice experiment. Health Econ. 2007;16(7):703–17.
18. Jung K, Feldman R, Scanlon D. Where would you go for your next hospitalization? J Health Econ. 2011;30(4):832–41.
19. Harris KM, Keane MP. A model of health plan choice: inferring preferences and perceptions from a combination of revealed preference and attitudinal data. J Econ. 1998;89(1):131–57.
20. Swait J, Erdem T. Brand effects on choice and choice set formation under uncertainty. Market Sci. 2007;26(5):679–97.
21. Swait J, et al. Context dependence and aggregation in disaggregate choice analysis. Market Lett. 2002;13:195–205.
22. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Berkeley, CA: University of California; 1974.
23. McFadden D. Disaggregate behavioral travel demand’s RUM side. A 30 year retrospective. Travel Behav Res. 2000:17–63.
24. Maddala G. Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1983.
25. Fiebig DG, Keane MP, Louviere J, Wasi N. The generalized multinomial logit model: accounting for scale and coefficient heterogeneity. Market Sci. 2010;29(3):393–421.
26. Hess S, Rose JM. Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models? Transportation. 2012;36(6):1225–39.
27. Revelt D, Train K. Mixed logit with repeated choices: households’ choices of appliance efficiency level. Rev Econ Stat. 1998;80(4):647–57.
28. Brownstone D, Train K. Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns. J Econ. 1998;89(1):109–29.
29. Hall J, Fiebig DG, King MT, Hossain I, Louviere JJ. What influences participation in genetic carrier testing? Results from a discrete choice experiment. J Health Econ. 2006;25(3):520–37.
30. Hole AR. Modelling heterogeneity in patients’ preferences for the attributes of a general practitioner appointment. J Health Econ. 2008;27(4):1078–94.
31. Louviere JJ, Street D, Burgess L, Wasi N, Islam T, Marley AA. Modeling the choices of individual decision-makers by combining efficient choice experiment designs with extra preference information. J Choice Model. 2008;1(1):128–64.
32. Keane M, Wasi N. Comparing alternative models of heterogeneity in consumer choice behavior. J Appl Econ. 2013;28(6):1018–45.
33. Lancsar E, Louviere J, Flynn T. Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments. Soc Sci Med. 2007;64(8):1738–53.
34. Fiebig DG, Knox S, Viney R, Haas M, Street DJ. Preferences for new and existing contraceptive products. Health Econ. 2011;20(S1):35–52.
35. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Estimating individual level discrete choice models and welfare measures using best–worst choice experiments and sequential best–worst MNL. Sydney: University of Technology, Centre for the Study of Choice (Censoc); 2008. p. 08-004.
36. Scarpa R, Notaro S, Louviere J, Raffaelli R. Exploring scale effects of best/worst rank ordered choice data to estimate benefits of tourism in alpine grazing commons. Am J Agric Econ. 2011;93(3):813–28.
37. Punj GN, Staelin R. The choice process for graduate business schools. J Market Res. 1978;15(4):588–98.
38. Chapman RG, Staelin R. Exploiting rank ordered choice set data within the stochastic utility model. J Market Res. 1982;19(3):288–301.
39. Beggs S, Cardell S, Hausman J. Assessing the potential demand for electric cars. J Econ. 1981;17(1):1–19.
40. Gu Y, Hole AR, Knox S. Fitting the generalized multinomial logit model in Stata. Stata J. 2013;13(2):382–97.
41. Hole AR. Fitting mixed logit models by using maxium simulated likelihood. Stata J. 2007;7:388–401.
42. Pacifico D, Yoo HI. lclogit: a stata module for estimating latent class conditional logit models via the Expectation-Maximization algorithm. Stata J. 2013;13(3):625–39.
43. Baker MJ. Adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling and estimation in Mata. Stata J. 2014;14(3):623–61.
44. Suits DB. Dummy variables: mechanics v. interpretation. Rev Econ Stat. 1984;66:177–80.
45. Bech M, Gyrd-Hansen D. Effects coding in discrete choice experiments. Health Econ. 2005;14(10):1079–83.
46. Hole AR, Yoo I. The use of heuristic optimization algorithms to facilitate maximum simulated likelihood estimation of random parameter logit models. J R Stat Soc C. 2017;. doi:10.1111/rssc.12209.
47. Czajkowski M, Budziński W. An insight into the numerical simulation bias—a comparison of efficiency and performance of different types of quasi Monte Carlo simulation methods under a wide range of experimental conditions. In: Environmental Choice Modelling Conference; Copenhagen; 2015.
48. Bhat CR. Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model. Transp Res Part B: Methodol. 2001;35(7):677–93.
49. Train KE. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
50. Hess S, Train KE, Polak JW. On the use of a Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a Mixed Logit Model for vehicle choice. Transp Res Part B: Methodol. 2006;40(2):147–63.
51. Garrido RA. Estimation performance of low discrepancy sequences in stated preferences. In: 10th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research; Lucerne; 2003.
52. Munger D, L’Ecuyer P, Bastin F, Cirillo C, Tuffin B. Estimation of the mixed logit likelihood function by randomized quasi-Monte Carlo. Transp Res Part B: Methodol. 2012;46(2):305–20.
53. Hole AR. A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures. Health Econ. 2007;16(8):827–40.
54. Train K, Weeks M. Discrete choice models in preference space and willingness-to-pay space: Applications of simulation methods in environmental and resource economics. Berlin: Springer; 2005. p. 1–16.
55. Ben-Akiva M, McFadden D, Train K. Foundations of stated preference elicitation consumer behavior and choice-based conjoint analysis. In: 2015, Society for economic measurement annual conference, Paris, 24 July 2015.
56. Greene WH, Hensher DA. A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit. Transp Res Part B: Methodol. 2003;37(8):681–98.
57. Johar M, Fiebig DG, Haas M, Viney R. Using repeated choice experiments to evaluate the impact of policy changes on cervical screening. Appl Econ. 2013;45(14):1845–55.
58. Lancsar E, Wildman J, Donaldson C, Ryan M, Baker R. Deriving distributional weights for QALYs through discrete choice experiments. J Health Econ. 2011;30:466–78.
59. Lancsar E, Savage E. Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistency between current methods and random utility and welfare theory. Health Econ. 2004;13(9):901–7.
60. Elshiewy O, Zenetti G, Boztug Y. Differences between classical and Bayesian estimates for mixed logit models: a replication study. J Appl Econ. 2017;32(2):470–76.
61. Ryan M, Bate A. Testing the assumptions of rationality, continuity and symmetry when apply- ing discrete choice experiments in health care. Appl Econ Lett. 2001;8:59–63.
62. Ryan M, San MF. Revisiting the axiom of completeness in health care. Health Econ. 2003;12:295–307.
63. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Deleting, “irrational” responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences? Health Econ. 2006;15(8):797–811.
64. Fiebig DG, Viney R, Knox S, Haas M, Street DJ, Hole AR, et al. Consideration sets and their role in modelling doctor recommendations about contraceptives. Health Econ. 2017;26(1):54–73.
65. Hensher DA, Greene WH. Non-attendance and dual processing of common-metric attributes in choice analysis: a latent class specification. Empir Econ. 2010;39(2):413–26.
66. Lagarde M. Investigating attribute non-attendance and its consequences in choice experiments with latent class models. Health Econ. 2013;22(5):554–67.
67. Hole AR, Kolstad JR, Gyrd-Hansen D. Inferred vs. Stated attribute non-attendance in choice experiments: a study of doctors’ prescription behaviour. J Econ Behav Organ. 2013;96:21–31.
68. Flynn TN, Bilger M, Finkelstein EA. Are efficient designs used in discrete choice experiments too difficult for some respondents? A case study eliciting preferences for end-of-life care. Phamacoeconomics. 2016;34(3):273–84.
69. Mark TL, Swait J. Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions. Health Econ. 2004;13(6):563–73.
70. Ben-Akiva M, Bradley M, Morikawa TJ, Benjamin T, Novak H, Oppewal H, et al. Combining revealed and stated preferences data. Market Lett. 1994;5(4):335–49.
71. Lancsar E, Burge P. Choice modelling research in health economics. In: Hess S, Daly A, editors. Handbook of choice modelling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Press; 2014. p. 675–87.
72. Hess S, Daly A. Handbook of choice modelling. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2014.