Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Representation of heteroskedasticity in discrete choice models

Contents:

Author Info

  • Munizaga, Marcela A.
  • Heydecker, Benjamin G.
  • Ortúzar, Juan de Dios
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    The Multinomial Logit, discrete choice model of transport demand, has several restrictions when compared with the more general Multinomial Probit model. The most famous of these are that unobservable components of utilities should be mutually independent and homoskedastic. Correlation can be accommodated to a certain extent by the Hierarchical Logit model, but the problem of heteroskedasticity has received less attention in the literature. We investigate the consequences of disregarding heteroskedasticity, and make some comparisons between models that can and those that cannot represent it. These comparisons, which use synthetic data with known characteristics, are made in terms of parameter recovery and estimates of response to policy changes. The Multinomial Logit, Hierarchical Logit, Single Element Nested Logit, Heteroskedastic Extreme Value Logit and Multinomial Probit models are tested using data that are consistent with various error structures; only the last three can represent heteroskedasticity explicitly. Two different kinds of heteroskedasticity are analysed: between options and between observations. The results show that in the first case, neither the Multinomial Logit nor the Single Element Nested Logit models can be used to estimate the response to policy changes accurately, but the Hierarchical Logit model performs surprisingly well. By contrast, in a certain case of discrete heteroskedasticity between observations, the simulation results show that in terms of response to policy variations the Multinomial Logit model performs as well as the theoretically correct Single Element Nested Logit and Multinomial Probit models. Furthermore, the Multinomial Logit Model recovered all parameters of the utility function accurately in this case. We conclude that the simpler members of the Logit family appear to be fairly robust with respect to some homoskedasticity violations, but that use of the more resource-intensive Multinomial Probit model is justified for handling the case of heteroskedasticity between options.

    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/B6V99-3YJYGYJ-4/2/6c0ad263cec9e92490ff6a59307b1f00
    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 Transportation Research Part B: Methodological.

    Volume (Year): 34 (2000)
    Issue (Month): 3 (April)
    Pages: 219-240

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:34:y:2000:i:3:p:219-240

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description

    Order Information:
    Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
    Web: https://shop.elsevier.com/order?id=548&ref=548_01_ooc_1&version=01

    Related research

    Keywords:

    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. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    2. Stern, Steven, 1992. "A Method for Smoothing Simulated Moments of Discrete Probabilities in Multinomial Probit Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 943-52, July.
    3. Vassilis A. Hajivassiliou & Daniel L. McFadden & Paul Ruud, 1993. "Simulation of Multivariate Normal Rectangle Probabilities and their Derivatives: Theoretical and Computational Results," Working Papers _024, Yale University.
    4. Bhat, Chandra R., 1998. "Accommodating flexible substitution patterns in multi-dimensional choice modeling: formulation and application to travel mode and departure time choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 455-466, September.
    5. Gaudry, Marc J. I. & Jara-Diaz, Sergio R. & Ortuzar, Juan de Dios, 1989. "Value of time sensitivity to model specification," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 151-158, April.
    6. Bolduc, Denis, 1999. "A practical technique to estimate multinomial probit models in transportation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 63-79, February.
    7. Borsch-Supan, Axel & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A., 1993. "Smooth unbiased multivariate probability simulators for maximum likelihood estimation of limited dependent variable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 347-368, August.
    8. Steckel, Joel H & Vanhonacker, Wilfried R, 1988. "A Heterogeneous Conditional Logit Model of Choice," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 391-98, July.
    9. Pakes, Ariel & Pollard, David, 1989. "Simulation and the Asymptotics of Optimization Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1027-57, September.
    10. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    11. Bhat, Chandra R., 1995. "A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 471-483, December.
    12. Bolduc, Denis, 1992. "Generalized autoregressive errors in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 155-170, April.
    13. Daly, Andrew, 1987. "Estimating "tree" logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 251-267, 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. Cantillo, Víctor & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2005. "A semi-compensatory discrete choice model with explicit attribute thresholds of perception," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 641-657, August.
    2. Cantillo, Víctor & Amaya, Johanna & Ortúzar, J. de D., 2010. "Thresholds and indifference in stated choice surveys," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 753-763, July.
    3. Espino, Raquel & de Dios Ortúzar, Juan & Román, Concepción, 2007. "Understanding suburban travel demand: Flexible modelling with revealed and stated choice data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 899-912, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Marisol Castro & Francisco Martínez & Marcela Munizaga, 2013. "Estimation of a constrained multinomial logit model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 563-581, May.
    6. Tsai, Rung-Ching & Bockenholt, Ulf, 2002. "Two-level linear paired comparison models: estimation and identifiability issues," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 429-449, July.
    7. Tsamboulas, Dimitrios A., 2001. "Parking fare thresholds: a policy tool," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 115-124, April.
    8. Kalouptsidis, N. & Koutroumbas, K. & Psaraki, V., 2007. "Classification methods for random utility models with i.i.d. disturbances under the most probable alternative rule," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1778-1794, February.
    9. Angel Bujosa & Jaume Rosselló, 2013. "Climate change and summer mass tourism: the case of Spanish domestic tourism," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 363-375, March.

    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:transb:v:34:y:2000:i:3:p:219-240. 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.