Modelling intransitive preferences: A random-effects approach

Abstract Current models for individual-level paired comparison data are based on the three assumptions that (1) pairwise judgments are independent, (2) the utility of an item remains invariant across trials, and (3) pair-specific variability can account for intransitive choice behaviour. All three assumptions seem strong and likely to be violated in empirical applications. This paper introduces a new framework for the analysis of paired comparison data which relaxes these three assumptions and considers the utilities associated with the same item across trials to be neither independent nor identical, but related. The proposed approach provides new insights about the reliability and consistency of paired comparison judgments and can account for systematic violations of transitivity. An application, based on a replication of Tversky's [(1969). Intransitivity of preference. Psychological Review, 76 , 31–48] gamble study, illustrates the usefulness of the new approach in modelling both transitive and intransitive preferences.

[1]  A. Genz.  Numerical Computation of Multivariate Normal Probabilities , 1992 .

[2]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNS THE METHOD OF PAIRED COMPARISONS , 1952 .

[3]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  Rank Analysis of Incomplete Block Designs: I. The Method of Paired Comparisons , 1952 .

[4]  U Böckenholt,et al.  Individual differences in paired comparison data. , 2001, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[5]  Jean-Claude Falmagne,et al.  Statistical issues in measurement , 1985 .

[6]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Two-level linear paired comparison models: estimation and identifiability issues , 2002, Math. Soc. Sci..

[7]  Thorn G. G. Bezembinder.  Circularity and consistency in paired comparisons , 1981 .

[8]  C. González-Vallejo.  Making trade-offs: a probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. , 2002, Psychological review.

[9]  H. Lindman,et al.  Stimulus complexity and choice inconsistency among gambles , 1978 .

[10]  H. Morrison.  Testable conditions for triads of paired comparison choices , 1963 .

[11]  B. Mellers,et al.  Similarity and Choice. , 1994 .

[12]  Albert Maydeu-Olivares,et al.  Limited information estimation and testing of Thurstonian models for paired comparison data under multiple judgment sampling , 2001 .

[13]  C. L. Mallows,et al.  Individual Choice Behaviour. , 1961 .

[14]  J. Douglas Carroll,et al.  Toward a new paradigm for the study of multiattribute choice behavior: Spatial and discrete modeling of pairwise preferences. , 1991 .

[15]  R. Tsai,et al.  Remarks on the identifiability of thurstonian paired comparison models under multiple judgment , 2003 .

[16]  A. Tversky.  Intransitivity of preferences. , 1969 .

[17]  Patrick Bossuyt,et al.  A Comparison of Probabilistic Unfolding Theories for Paired Comparisons Data , 1990 .

[18]  Robert Sugden,et al.  Incorporating a stochastic element into decision theories , 1995 .

[19]  R. Luce.  Utility of Gains and Losses: Measurement-Theoretical and Experimental Approaches , 2000 .

[20]  Richard Gonzalez,et al.  On the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  H. A. David,et al.  The method of paired comparisons , 1966 .

[22]  Yoshio Takane,et al.  Analysis of Covariance Structures and Probabilistic Binary Choice Data , 1989 .

[23]  J. Hey,et al.  INVESTIGATING GENERALIZATIONS OF EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY USING EXPERIMENTAL DATA , 1994, Experiments in Economics.

[24]  U Böckenholt.  Hierarchical modeling of paired comparison data. , 2001, Psychological methods.

[25]  Philip E. Gill,et al.  Practical optimization , 1981 .

[26]  Albert Maydeu-Olivares,et al.  Thurstonian Covariance and Correlation Structures for Multiple Judgment Paired Comparison Data , 2003 .

[27]  L. Thurstone.  A law of comparative judgment. , 1994 .

[28]  Henry Montgomery,et al.  A Study of Intransitive Preferences using a Think Aloud Procedure , 1977 .

[29]  John B. Kidd,et al.  Decision Making and Change in Human Affairs , 1979 .

[30]  Richard Gonzalez,et al.  Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function , 1996 .