On finite sample performance of confidence intervals methods for willingness to pay measures

This paper systematically compares finite sample performances of methods to build confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures in a choice modeling context. It contributes to the field by also considering methods developed in other research fields. Various scenarios are evaluated under an extensive Monte Carlo study. Results show that the commonly used Delta method, producing symmetric intervals around the point estimate, often fails to account for skewness in the estimated willingness to pay distribution. Both the Fieller method and the likelihood ratio test inversion method produce more realistic confidence intervals for small samples. Some bootstrap methods also perform reasonably well, in terms of effective coverage. Finally, empirical data are used to illustrate an application of the methods considered.

[1]  J. Hirschberg,et al.  A Geometric Comparison of the Delta and Fieller Confidence Intervals , 2010 .

[2]  Juan de Dios Ortúzar,et al.  The Chilean value of time study: methodological developments , 1993 .

[3]  Lynda Khalaf,et al.  Finite sample inference methods for dynamic energy demand models , 2007 .

[4]  Juan de Dios Ortúzar,et al.  Confidence intervals to bound the value of time , 2001 .

[5]  Edoardo Marcucci,et al.  Quality and Public Transport Service Contracts , 2007 .

[6]  E. Marcucci,et al.  Urban freight transport modelling: an agent-specific approach , 2014 .

[7]  John M. Rose,et al.  Confidence intervals of willingness-to-pay for random coefficient logit models , 2013 .

[8]  Paul Kabaila.  SOME PROPERTIES OF PROFILE BOOTSTRAP CONFIDENCE INTERVALS , 1993 .

[9]  Andrew Daly,et al.  Calculating Errors for Measures Derived from Choice Modeling Estimates , 2012 .

[10]  J Carpenter,et al.  Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  I. Krinsky,et al.  On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities: A Correction , 1990 .

[12]  G. Marsaglia.  Ratios of Normal Variables , 2006 .

[13]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  A new baseline model for estimating willingness to pay from discrete choice models , 2013, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.

[14]  David A. Hensher,et al.  The Mixed Logit Model: the State of Practice and Warnings for the Unwary , 2001 .

[15]  Paul H. Garthwaite,et al.  Generating Monte Carlo Confidence Intervals by the Robbins-Monro Process , 1992 .

[16]  D. Bolduc,et al.  Identification robust confidence set methods for inference on parameter ratios with application to discrete choice models , 2010 .

[17]  B. Efron,et al.  Bootstrap confidence intervals , 1996 .

[18]  Edoardo Marcucci,et al.  Urban Freight Transport Policy Changes: Improving Decision Makers’ Awareness Via an Agent-Specific Approach , 2014 .

[19]  James R. Carpenter,et al.  Test inversion bootstrap confidence intervals , 1999 .

[20]  B. Efron.  Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife , 1979 .

[21]  E. C. Fieller.  SOME PROBLEMS IN INTERVAL ESTIMATION , 1954 .

[22]  D. Hinkley.  On the ratio of two correlated normal random variables , 1969 .

[23]  E. Marcucci,et al.  Dissecting preference heterogeneity in consumer stated choices , 2012 .

[24]  Arne Risa Hole,et al.  A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures. , 2007, Health economics.

[25]  I. Krinsky,et al.  On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities , 1986 .

[26]  B. Efron.  Better Bootstrap Confidence Intervals , 1987 .

[27]  E. Marcucci,et al.  INTR-AGENT HETEROGENEITY IN URBAN FREIGHT DISTRIBUTION: THE CASE OF OWN ACCOUNT OPERATORS , 2013 .

[28]  E. C. Fieller.  THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE INDEX IN A NORMAL BIVARIATE POPULATION , 1932 .

[29]  Luisa Scaccia,et al.  Urban freight, parking and pricing policies: An evaluation from a transport providers’ perspective , 2015 .