Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

It's not where you do it, it's who you do it with?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Morey, Edward R.
  • Kritzberg, David

Abstract

Individuals often recreate with others, but models of recreation-site choice (which ski area, climbing route, golf course, or bike trail) ignore the social aspect—a trait they share with most choice models. Site-choice models seek to explain site choice as a function of only the cost of visiting each site, the physical characteristics of the sites, income, and other characteristics of the individual. They ignore the influence of others on site choice. We find, using choice experiments, that having a companion and the companion's relative ability are critical determinants of site choice—what social psychology would predict. One will often choose a site less preferred in terms of its costs and characteristics if one has a companion of one's ability at the lesser site but not at the better site. Companions of comparable ability are preferred over companions that are better or worse. And, importantly, how one values the physical characteristics of sites depends on whether one has a companion. The magnitudes of our estimated companion effects suggest recreation-demand models that ignore them, all do, omit a critical endogenous variable. An implication is that observed trip patterns can be generated by social-interaction game playing (“where I go depends on where you go and …”), not utility maximization in isolation. This paper does not model the game; it estimates a recreator's utility/reaction function with companion effects, showing the importance of the social component.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534513000055
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of choice modelling.

Volume (Year): 5 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 176-191

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:5:y:2012:i:3:p:176-191

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling

Related research

Keywords: choice; choice experiment; competition; companion effects; relative ability; recreation; social interactions; social psychology;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Shaw, W. Douglass & Jakus, Paul M., 1996. "Travel Cost Models Of The Demand For Rock Climbing," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 25(2), October.
  2. Brock,W.A. & Durlauf,S.N., 2002. "A multinomial choice model of neighborhood effects," Working papers 4, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  3. Bruce Sacerdote, 2001. "Peer Effects With Random Assignment: Results For Dartmouth Roommates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(2), pages 681-704, May.
  4. Brock, William A. & Durlauf, Steven N., 2001. "Interactions-based models," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 54, pages 3297-3380 Elsevier.
  5. George J. Borjas, 1991. "Ethnic Capital and Intergenerational Mobility," NBER Working Papers 3788, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Sanjeev Goyal & Fernando Vega-Redondo, 2003. "Network Formation and Social Coordination," Working Papers 481, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
  7. Brock,W.A. & Durlauf,S.N., 2000. "Discrete choice with social interactions," Working papers 7, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  8. Jackson, Matthew O. & Watts, Alison, 2002. "On the formation of interaction networks in social coordination games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 265-291, November.
  9. Marianne Bertrand & Erzo F.P. Luttmer & Sendhil Mullainathan, 1998. "Network Effects and Welfare Cultures," NBER Working Papers 6832, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Timmins, Christopher & Murdock, Jennifer, 2007. "A revealed preference approach to the measurement of congestion in travel cost models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 230-249, March.
  11. Pollak, Robert A, 1976. "Interdependent Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 309-20, June.
  12. Chapman, David J. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2000. "Environmental Damages in Court: The American Trader Case," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt3hn320jh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
  13. Munshi, Kaivan & Myaux, Jacques, 2006. "Social norms and the fertility transition," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-38, June.
  14. Therese C. Grijalva & Robert P. Berrens & Alok K. Bohara & Paul M. Jakus & W. Douglass Shaw, 2002. "Valuing the Loss of Rock Climbing Access in Wilderness Areas: A National-Level, Random-Utility Model," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(1), pages 103-120.
  15. Veblen, Thorstein, 1899. "The Theory of the Leisure Class," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number veblen1899.
  16. Durlauf,S.N., 2000. "A framework for the study of individual behavior and social interactions," Working papers 16, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  17. Kenneth E. McConnell, 1977. "Congestion and Willingness to Pay: A Study of Beach Use," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 53(2), pages 185-195.
  18. Evans, William N & Oates, Wallace E & Schwab, Robert M, 1992. "Measuring Peer Group Effects: A Study of Teenage Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 966-91, October.
  19. Morey, Edward R., 1985. "Characteristics, consumer surplus, and new activities : A proposed ski area," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 221-236, March.
  20. Hojman, Daniel A. & Szeidl, Adam, 2006. "Endogenous networks, social games, and evolution," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 112-130, April.
  21. Chapman, David J. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2000. "Environmental damages in court: the "American trader" case," CUDARE Working Paper Series 913, University of California at Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Policy.
  22. Boxall, Peter & Rollins, Kimberly & Englin, Jeffrey, 2003. "Heterogeneous preferences for congestion during a wilderness experience," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 177-195, May.
  23. Brian Krauth, 2006. "Social interactions in small groups," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(2), pages 414-433, May.
  24. Frank J. Cesario, 1980. "Congestion and the Valuation of Recreation Benefits," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(3), pages 329-338.
  25. Loomis, John B. & Gonzalez-Caban, Armando & Englin, Jeffrey E., 2001. "Testing For Differential Effects Of Forest Fires On Hiking And Mountain Biking Demand And Benefits," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(02), December.
  26. Charles F. Manski, 2000. "Economic Analysis of Social Interactions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 115-136, Summer.
  27. Kaoru, Yoshiaki, 1995. "Measuring marine recreation benefits of water quality improvements by the nested random utility model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 119-136, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Marcella Veronesi & Martina Menon & Federico Perali, 2007. "Extensions of the Traditional Travel Cost Model of Non-Market Valuation to a Collective Framework: Evidence from the Field," Working Papers 42/2007, University of Verona, Department of Economics.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:5:y:2012:i:3:p:176-191. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.