Dominance among alternatives in random utility models
AbstractIn many discrete choice contexts the actual choice set, including the alternatives effectively perceived and considered by the decision maker, may substantially differ from the universal choice set, including all available alternatives: one of the most relevant examples within transport demand simulation is probably the choice of destination, wherein the universal choice set normally includes hundreds of traffic zones. In these cases, proper simulation of the choice set is crucial for correct simulation of the choice context. In this regard, our paper has two main objectives. The first is to give a general contribution to choice set modelling by extending and applying the concept of dominance among alternatives to the framework of random utility theory. The main result is the definition of a methodology for the generation of new dominance attributes, which can be used in choice set modelling. The second aim is to make a specific contribution to destination choice modelling: dominance attributes are defined from the above methodology and introduced into this choice context, and new spatial variables reproducing better knowledge of zones with a privileged spatial position are also proposed. Methodology and attributes are tested both on synthetic and on real data.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.
Volume (Year): 43 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (February)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description
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.:
- Basar, Gözen & Bhat, Chandra, 2004. "A parameterized consideration set model for airport choice: an application to the San Francisco Bay Area," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 889-904, December.
- Shugan, Steven M, 1980. " The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
- John R. Hauser & Steven P. Gaskin, 1984. "Application of the “Defender” Consumer Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 327-351.
- Swait, Joffre, 2001. "Choice set generation within the generalized extreme value family of discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 643-666, August.
- Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Empirical test of a constrained choice discrete model: Mode choice in São Paulo, Brazil," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 103-115, April.
- Dennis H. Gensch, 1987. "A Two-Stage Disaggregate Attribute Choice Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 223-239.
- Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 91-102, April.
- Swait, Joffre, 2001. "A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 903-928, November.
- Gaundry, Marc J. I. & Dagenais, Marcel G., 1979. "The dogit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 105-111, June.
- Cantillo, Víctor & Heydecker, Benjamin & de Dios Ortúzar, Juan, 2006. "A discrete choice model incorporating thresholds for perception in attribute values," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 807-825, November.
- Williams, H. C. W. L. & Ortuzar, J. D., 1982. "Behavioural theories of dispersion and the mis-specification of travel demand models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 167-219, June.
- Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2004. "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 391-406, October.
- Daly, Andrew, 1982. "Estimating choice models containing attraction variables," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 5-15, February.
- Mancuso, Paolo, 2014. "An analysis of the competition that impinges on the Milan–Rome intercity passenger transport link," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 42-52.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.