Hybrid Choice Modeling of New Technologies for Car Choice in Canada

In the past decade, a new trend in discrete choice modeling has emerged: psychological factors are explicitly incorporated to enhance the behavioral representation of the choice process. In this context, hybrid models expand on standard choice models by including attitudes and perceptions as latent variables. The complete model is composed of a group of structural equations describing the latent variables in terms of observable exogenous variables and a group of measurement relationships linking latent variables to certain observable indicators. Although the estimation of hybrid models requires the evaluation of complex multidimensional integrals, simulated maximum likelihood is implemented to solve the integrated multiple-equation model. This study empirically evaluates the application of hybrid choice modeling to data from a survey conducted by the Energy and Materials Research Group (Simon Fraser University, 2002 and 2003) of the virtual personal vehicle choices made by Canadian consumers when they are faced with technological innovations. The survey also includes a complete list of indicators that allows the application of a hybrid choice model formulation. It is concluded that the hybrid choice model is genuinely capable of adapting to practical situations by including latent variables among the set of explanatory variables. The incorporation of perceptions and attitudes in this way leads to more realistic models and gives a better description of the profile of consumers and their adoption of new automobile technologies.

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

[2]  K. Train,et al.  Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns , 1998 .

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

[4]  Joan L. Walker,et al.  Extended Framework for Modeling Choice Behavior , 1999 .

[5]  M. Ben-Akiva,et al.  A Multinational Probit Formulation for Large Choice Sets , 1991 .

[6]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  STRUCTURE OF PASSENGER TRAVEL DEMAND MODELS , 1974 .

[7]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete choice models incorporating revealed preferences and psychometric data , 2002 .

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

[9]  Mark Jaccard,et al.  Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions , 2005 .

[10]  Kenneth E. Train,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[11]  D. S. Bunch,et al.  Estimability in the Multinomial Probit Model , 1989 .

[12]  Joan L. Walker,et al.  Generalized random utility model , 2002, Math. Soc. Sci..

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

[14]  Matthew Horne,et al.  INCORPORATING PREFERENCES FOR PERSONAL URBAN TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGIES INTO A HYBRID ENERGY-ECONOMY MODEL , 2003 .

[15]  Ricardo Alvarez-Daziano,et al.  Testing Mixed Logit and Probit Models by Simulation , 2005 .

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

[17]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

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

[19]  Joan L. Walker,et al.  Hybrid Choice Models: Progress and Challenges , 2002 .

[20]  D. McFadden.  The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research , 1986 .

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

[22]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Hybrid Choice Models with Logit Kernel: Applicability to Large Scale Models1 , 2005 .