On the variability of hybrid discrete choice models

It is well-known that not all the variables affecting decisions in a discrete choice situation are objective characteristics of the alternatives. Some of them are associated with difficult to measure attributes which may be represented as latent variables. Since this type of variables cannot be directly observed by the analyst, they must be estimated through a special model (typically a MIMIC model), but this includes an error term. We have found no discussion about the fact that if one estimates a hybrid discrete choice model (i.e. incorporating latent variables) one should find that the variability of its utility function increases in relation to that of a classic discrete choice model without latent variables. To analyse the effects of this induced variability we conducted a theoretical analysis of the problem and complemented it with misspecification and response analysis tests using artificial data. We found that the extra variability has no major effects over the model estimates except when alternatives are correlated, a far too often occurrence in practice.

[1]  Andreas Ritter,et al.  Structural Equations With Latent Variables , 2016 .

[2]  D. Blumenfeld Operations Research Calculations Handbook , 2001 .

[3]  Sebastián Raveau,et al.  Modelling and Forecasting with Latent Variables in Discrete Choice Panel Models , 2009 .

[4]  Juan de Dios Ortúzar,et al.  The Role of Tangible Attributes in Hybrid Discrete Choice Models , 2010 .

[5]  H. Williams,et al.  Behavioural theories of dispersion and the mis-specification of travel demand models☆ , 1982 .

[6]  D. Bolduc,et al.  Sequential and Simultaneous Estimation of Hybrid Discrete Choice Models , 2010 .

[7]  W. Lam,et al.  MODELING AIR PASSENGER TRAVEL BEHAVIOR ON AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS MODE CHOICES , 2008 .

[8]  Leon G. Higley,et al.  Forensic Entomology: An Introduction , 2009 .

[9]  Joan L. Walker Mixed Logit (or Logit Kernel) Model: Dispelling Misconceptions of Identification , 2002 .

[10]  William H. K. Lam,et al.  Incorporating passenger perceived service quality in airport ground access mode choice model , 2010 .

[11]  A. Daly,et al.  Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on rail travel behaviour , 2012 .

[12]  Kalidas Ashok,et al.  Extending Discrete Choice Models to Incorporate Attitudinal and Other Latent Variables , 2002 .

[13]  H. Mahmassani In Perpetual Motion: Travel Behaviour Research Opportunities and Application Challenges , 2002 .

[14]  Denis Bolduc,et al.  On estimation of Hybrid Choice Models , 2009 .

[15]  Paul E. Green,et al.  Hybrid Models for Conjoint Analysis: An Expository Review , 1984 .

[16]  Dennis Blumenfeld,et al.  Operations Research Calculations Handbook, Second Edition , 2009 .

[17]  D. McFadden,et al.  URBAN TRAVEL DEMAND - A BEHAVIORAL ANALYSIS , 1977 .

[18]  Andrew Daly,et al.  Choice Modelling: The State-of-the-art and the State-of-practice: Proceedings from the Inaugural International Choice Modelling Conference , 2010 .

[19]  Joan L. Walker,et al.  Integration of Choice and Latent Variable Models , 1999 .

[20]  Ricardo A. Daziano,et al.  Incorporating pro-environmental preferences towards green automobile technologies through a Bayesian hybrid choice model , 2013 .

[21]  Maria Johansson,et al.  The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice , 2006 .

[22]  Juan Antonio Carrasco,et al.  Review and assessment of the nested logit model , 2002 .

[23]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1985 .

[24]  Juan de Dios Ortúzar,et al.  Modelling Transport: Ortúzar/Modelling Transport , 2011 .

[25]  H. Williams On the Formation of Travel Demand Models and Economic Evaluation Measures of User Benefit , 1977 .

[26]  D. Hensher,et al.  DETERMINANTS of travel choice , 1978 .