1 / 8

Lexicographic / discontinuous choices

Lexicographic / discontinuous choices. Lexicographic choices. Respondents base their choice on a subset of the presented attributes Continuity axiom is violated = no trade-off between the attributes Biased welfare estimates. Sources. Choice heuristics (choice set complexity)

semah
Télécharger la présentation

Lexicographic / discontinuous choices

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Lexicographic / discontinuous choices

  2. Lexicographic choices • Respondents base their choice on a subset of the presented attributes • Continuity axiom is violated = no trade-off between the attributes • Biased welfare estimates

  3. Sources • Choice heuristics (choice set complexity) • Protest responses (paying for env, pay vehicle) • Design issues (causal att, levels) • True preferences

  4. Some empirical work • Hensher, Rose and Greene, 2005 • Campbell, Hutchinson and Scarpa, 2007 • Carlsson, Kataria and Lampi, 2008

  5. Hensher et al. (2005) “The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes” • Study = car commuters in Sydney • Model = Mixed logit model with individual specific coefficients • Coefficients are restricted to zero if the respondent ignored that attribute • Results = restricted model leads to 18-62% higher value of time

  6. Campbell et al. (2007) “Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments” • Study = rural environmental landscapes in Ireland • Model = ECM allowing for differences in scale and error variance between subsets of respondents. • Also weighting of attributes • Findings: • Error variance in discontinuous subset is significantly higher • Scaling and weighting leads to lower WTP estimates

  7. Carlsson et al. (2008) “Ignoring attributes in choice experiments” • Study = three environmental objectives in Sweden • Model = RPL with parameters restricted to 0 if ignored • Three assumptions in estimating WTP: • All respondents positive WTP • Ignoring env attribute zero WTP • Ignoring costs and env attribute zero WTP • Findings: • No systematic differences between restr and unrestr model • Only significant differences in WTP if assumed that ignoring attribute means zero WTP

  8. CM challenges • Survey design? • Complexity • Follow-up questions • Reasons for choice behaviour? • Choice heuristics • True zero WTP • Analysis? • Econometric models • Respondents who ignore cost attribute

More Related