Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models?

There is growing interest in the notion that a significant component of the heterogeneity retrieved in random coefficients models may actually relate to variations in absolute sensitivities, a phenomenon referred to as scale heterogeneity. As a result, a number of authors have tried to explicitly model such scale heterogeneity, which is shared across coefficients, and separate it from heterogeneity in individual coefficients. This direction of work has in part motivated the development of specialised modelling tools such as the G-MNL model. While not disagreeing with the notion that scale heterogeneity across respondents exists, this paper argues that attempts in the literature to disentangle scale heterogeneity from heterogeneity in individual coefficients in discrete choice models are misguided. In particular, we show how the various model specifications can in fact simply be seen as different parameterisations, and that any gains in fit obtained in random scale models are the result of using more flexible distributions, rather than an ability to capture scale heterogeneity. We illustrate our arguments through an empirical example and show how the conclusions from past work are based on misinterpretations of model results.

[1]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[2]  Christophe Béné,et al.  Storage and Viability of a Fishery with Resource and Market Dephased Seasonalities , 2000 .

[3]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  The Effect of Attribute Variation on Consumer Choice Consistency , 1999 .

[4]  D. Hensher,et al.  Assessing the influence of design dimensions on stated choice experiment estimates , 2005 .

[5]  Stephane Hess,et al.  Linking Response Quality to Survey Engagement: A Combined Random Scale and Latent Variable Approach , 2013 .

[6]  M. Bierlaire,et al.  Discrete choice models with multiplicative error terms , 2009 .

[7]  K. Train,et al.  Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles , 1999, Controlling Automobile Air Pollution.

[8]  P. Clark.  A Subordinated Stochastic Process Model with Finite Variance for Speculative Prices , 1973 .

[9]  Kenneth Train,et al.  Utility in Willingness to Pay Space: A Tool to Address Confounding Random Scale Effects in Destination Choice to the Alps , 2008 .

[10]  Mark D. Uncles,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1987 .

[11]  C. Bhat.  Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model , 2001 .

[12]  John M. Rose,et al.  Random Scale Heterogeneity in Discrete Choice Models , 2009 .

[13]  Andrew Daly,et al.  Assuring finite moments for willingness to pay in random coefficient models , 2009 .

[14]  J. Halton.  On the efficiency of certain quasi-random sequences of points in evaluating multi-dimensional integrals , 1960 .

[15]  D. McFadden,et al.  MIXED MNL MODELS FOR DISCRETE RESPONSE , 2000 .

[16]  Turalay Kenc,et al.  Ox: An Object-Oriented Matrix Language , 1997 .

[17]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Combining Sources of Preference Data for Modeling Complex Decision Processes , 1999 .

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

[19]  Minxian Yang,et al.  Normal Log-normal Mixture: Leptokurtosis, Skewness and Applications , 2004 .

[20]  Jj Louviere,et al.  Confound it! That pesky little scale constant messes up our convenient assumptions , 2006 .

[21]  M. Bierlaire,et al.  ESTIMATION OF VALUE OF TRAVEL-TIME SAVINGS USING MIXED LOGIT MODELS , 2005 .

[22]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Designing Discrete Choice Experiments: Do Optimal Designs Come at a Price? , 2008 .

[23]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Formal Choice Models of Informal Choices: What Choice Modeling Research Can (and Can't) Learn from Behavioral Theory , 2008 .

[24]  Joan L. Walker.  Extended discrete choice models : integrated framework, flexible error structures, and latent variables , 2001 .

[25]  Minxian Yang.  Normal log-normal mixture, leptokurtosis and skewness , 2008 .

[26]  Joffre Swait,et al.  Distinguishing taste variation from error structure in discrete choice data , 2000 .

[27]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[28]  Joffre Swait,et al.  Choice Environment, Market Complexity, and Consumer Behavior: A Theoretical and Empirical Approach for Incorporating Decision Complexity into Models of Consumer Choice , 2001 .

[29]  Robert Kohn,et al.  Dissecting the Random Component of Utility , 2002 .

[30]  Joffre Swait,et al.  ADVANCED CHOICE MODELS , 2006 .

[31]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Formal Choice Models of Informal Choices , 2008 .

[32]  K. Train.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2003 .

[33]  Edward R. Morey,et al.  Investigating Preference Heterogeneity in a Repeated Discrete-Choice Recreation Demand Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing , 2000, Marine Resource Economics.

[34]  B. Kanninen,et al.  Valuing environmental amenities using stated choice studies : a common sense approach to theory and practice , 2010 .

[35]  Denzil G. Fiebig,et al.  The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity , 2010, Mark. Sci..

[36]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Combining sources of preference data , 1998 .

[37]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Does scale heterogeneity across individuals matter? An empirical assessment of alternative logit models , 2010 .