IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v47y2020i1d10.1007_s11116-018-9891-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the influence of indicators’ complexity on hybrid discrete choice model estimates

Author

Listed:
  • Luis Márquez

    (Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia)

  • Víctor Cantillo

    (Universidad del Norte)

  • Julián Arellana

    (Universidad del Norte)

Abstract

Hybrid discrete choice (HDC) modeling requires indicators to allow for the identification of latent variables. An indicator usually expresses the level of agreement of a respondent with a given statement, generally based on a Likert scale response. Literature exhibits remarkable variations regarding indicators’ complexity, expressed by the number of indicators for each latent variable, the type of scale, and granularity. Dealing with different levels of complexity implies that respondents require different cognitive efforts when choosing a relevant Likert point. Further, as a Likert item is undoubtedly a set of ordered categories, modelers face the challenge of estimating a large number of threshold parameters resulting from greater complexity when using ordered models for measurement equations. This paper studies the influence of indicators’ complexity on the estimation of HDC models based on an experiment that systematically varies the number of indicators, the granularity and the type of scale. We specified a proper parameterization of the scale factor of the measurement component for capturing potential effects of complexity in measurement equations. Findings revealed that granularity and its quadratic effect, as well as the interaction between granularity and number of indicators, affect the error variance of the measurement component and have a substantial impact on the goodness-of-fit of the discrete choice sub-model. Modeling results also showed that using odd-numbered scales, widely used in transportation choice studies, contribute to a lower error variance of the measurement component.

Suggested Citation

  • Luis Márquez & Víctor Cantillo & Julián Arellana, 2020. "Assessing the influence of indicators’ complexity on hybrid discrete choice model estimates," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 373-396, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:47:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11116-018-9891-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-018-9891-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-018-9891-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-018-9891-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vredin Johansson, Maria & Heldt, Tobias & Johansson, Per, 2006. "The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 507-525, July.
    2. Weijters, Bert & Cabooter, Elke & Schillewaert, Niels, 2010. "The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 236-247.
    3. André Duarte & Camila Garcia & Grigoris Giannarakis & Susana Limão & Amalia Polydoropoulou & Nikolaos Litinas, 2010. "New approaches in transportation planning: happiness and transport economics," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 5-32, April.
    4. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
    5. Marcel Paulssen & Dirk Temme & Akshay Vij & Joan Walker, 2014. "Values, attitudes and travel behavior: a hierarchical latent variable mixed logit model of travel mode choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 873-888, July.
    6. Swait, Joffre & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2001. "The Influence of Task Complexity on Consumer Choice: A Latent Class Model of Decision Strategy Switching," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 135-148, June.
    7. Soto, Jose J. & Márquez, Luis & Macea, Luis F., 2018. "Accounting for attitudes on parking choice: An integrated choice and latent variable approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 65-77.
    8. Rafael Maldonado-Hinarejos & Aruna Sivakumar & John Polak, 2014. "Exploring the role of individual attitudes and perceptions in predicting the demand for cycling: a hybrid choice modelling approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(6), pages 1287-1304, November.
    9. Caussade, Sebastián & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Rizzi, Luis I. & Hensher, David A., 2005. "Assessing the influence of design dimensions on stated choice experiment estimates," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 621-640, August.
    10. Álvaro Fernández-Heredia & Sergio Jara-Díaz & Andrés Monzón, 2016. "Modelling bicycle use intention: the role of perceptions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-23, January.
    11. Rose, John M. & Hensher, David A. & Caussade, Sebastian & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Jou, Rong-Chang, 2009. "Identifying differences in willingness to pay due to dimensionality in stated choice experiments: a cross country analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 21-29.
    12. Kim, Jinhee & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry, 2017. "Satisfaction and uncertainty in car-sharing decisions: An integration of hybrid choice and random regret-based models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 13-33.
    13. Arentze, Theo & Borgers, Aloys & Timmermans, Harry & DelMistro, Romano, 2003. "Transport stated choice responses: effects of task complexity, presentation format and literacy," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 229-244, May.
    14. Vij, Akshay & Walker, Joan L., 2016. "How, when and why integrated choice and latent variable models are latently useful," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 192-217.
    15. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    16. Francisco J. Bahamonde-Birke & Uwe Kunert & Heike Link & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2017. "About attitudes and perceptions: finding the proper way to consider latent variables in discrete choice models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 475-493, May.
    17. Di Ciommo, Floridea & Monzón, Andrés & Fernandez-Heredia, Alvaro, 2013. "Improving the analysis of road pricing acceptability surveys by using hybrid models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 302-316.
    18. Chao Chen & Caspar Chorus & Eric Molin & Bert Wee, 2016. "Effects of task complexity and time pressure on activity-travel choices: heteroscedastic logit model and activity-travel simulator experiment," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 455-472, May.
    19. Márquez, Luis & Pico, Ricardo & Cantillo, Víctor, 2018. "Understanding captive user behavior in the competition between BRT and motorcycle taxis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-9.
    20. Abrantes, Pedro A.L. & Wardman, Mark R., 2011. "Meta-analysis of UK values of travel time: An update," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 1-17, January.
    21. Nowlis, Stephen M & Kahn, Barbara E & Dhar, Ravi, 2002. "Coping with Ambivalence: The Effect of Removing a Neutral Option on Consumer Attitude and Preference Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(3), pages 319-334, December.
    22. Cervero, Robert & Golub, Aaron, 2007. "Informal transport: A global perspective," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 445-457, November.
    23. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth E. & Polak, John W., 2006. "On the use of a Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a Mixed Logit Model for vehicle choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 147-163, February.
    24. Andrew Daly & Stephane Hess & Bhanu Patruni & Dimitris Potoglou & Charlene Rohr, 2012. "Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on rail travel behaviour," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 267-297, March.
    25. Yáñez, M.F. & Raveau, S. & Ortúzar, J. de D., 2010. "Inclusion of latent variables in Mixed Logit models: Modelling and forecasting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 744-753, November.
    26. Kamargianni, Maria & Dubey, Subodh & Polydoropoulou, Amalia & Bhat, Chandra, 2015. "Investigating the subjective and objective factors influencing teenagers’ school travel mode choice – An integrated choice and latent variable model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 473-488.
    27. Small, Kenneth A., 2012. "Valuation of travel time," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 2-14.
    28. Márquez, Luis & Cantillo, Víctor & Arellana, Julián, 2014. "How are comfort and safety perceived by inland waterway transport passengers?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 46-52.
    29. Dirk Temme & Marcel Paulssen & Till Dannewald, 2007. "Integrating latent variables in discrete choice models – How higher-order values and attitudes determine consumer choice," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2007-065, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Arellana, J. & Garzón, L. & Estrada, J. & Cantillo, V., 2020. "On the use of virtual immersive reality for discrete choice experiments to modelling pedestrian behaviour," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    2. Nokhaiz Tariq Khan & Javed Aslam & Ateeq Abdul Rauf & Yun Bae Kim, 2022. "The Case of South Korean Airlines-Within-Airlines Model: Helping Full-Service Carriers Challenge Low-Cost Carriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Ma, Xinwei & Zhang, Shuai & Wu, Tao & Yang, Yizhe & Yu, Jiajie, 2023. "Can dockless and docked bike-sharing substitute each other? Evidence from Nanjing, China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    4. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    5. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    6. Petr Mariel & Linda Arata, 2022. "Incorporating attitudes into the evaluation of preferences regarding agri‐environmental practices," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 430-451, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Weibo Li & Maria Kamargianni, 2020. "An Integrated Choice and Latent Variable Model to Explore the Influence of Attitudinal and Perceptual Factors on Shared Mobility Choices and Their Value of Time Estimation," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 62-83, January.
    2. Bouscasse, H., 2018. "Integrated choice and latent variable models: A literature review on mode choice," Working Papers 2018-07, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    3. Hélène Bouscasse, 2018. "Integrated choice and latent variable models: A literature review on mode choice," Working Papers hal-01795630, HAL.
    4. Isabel P Albaladejo & M Teresa Díaz-Delfa, 2021. "The effects of motivations to go to the country on rural accommodation choice: A hybrid discrete choice model," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(7), pages 1484-1507, November.
    5. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    6. Tran, Yen & Yamamoto, Toshiyuki & Sato, Hitomi, 2020. "The influences of environmentalism and attitude towards physical activity on mode choice: The new evidences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 211-226.
    7. Soto, Jose J. & Márquez, Luis & Macea, Luis F., 2018. "Accounting for attitudes on parking choice: An integrated choice and latent variable approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 65-77.
    8. Bouscasse, Hélène & de Lapparent, Matthieu, 2019. "Perceived comfort and values of travel time savings in the Rhône-Alpes Region," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 370-387.
    9. Gustavo García-Melero & Rubén Sainz-González & Pablo Coto-Millán & Alejandra Valencia-Vásquez, 2021. "Sustainable Mobility Policy Analysis Using Hybrid Choice Models: Is It the Right Choice?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Kim, Seheon & Rasouli, Soora, 2022. "The influence of latent lifestyle on acceptance of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS): A hierarchical latent variable and latent class approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 304-319.
    11. Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2022. "Endogeneity and Measurement Bias of the Indicator Variables in Hybrid Choice Models: A Monte Carlo Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 605-629, November.
    12. Dekker, Thijs & Hess, Stephane & Brouwer, Roy & Hofkes, Marjan, 2016. "Decision uncertainty in multi-attribute stated preference studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 57-73.
    13. Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J. & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2017. "Analyzing the continuity of attitudinal and perceptual indicators in hybrid choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 28-39.
    14. Mikkel Thorhauge & Elisabetta Cherchi & Joan L. Walker & Jeppe Rich, 2019. "The role of intention as mediator between latent effects and behavior: application of a hybrid choice model to study departure time choices," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1421-1445, August.
    15. Francisco J. Bahamonde-Birke & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2015. "About the Categorization of Latent Variables in Hybrid Choice Models," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1527, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    16. Márquez, Luis & Pico, Ricardo & Cantillo, Víctor, 2018. "Understanding captive user behavior in the competition between BRT and motorcycle taxis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-9.
    17. Dea van Lierop & Francisco J. Bahamonde-Birke, 2023. "Commuting to the future: Assessing the relationship between individuals’ usage of information and communications technology, personal attitudes, characteristics and mode choice," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 353-371, June.
    18. Márquez, Luis & Alfonso A, Julieth V. & Poveda, Juan C., 2019. "In-vehicle crowding: Integrating tangible attributes, attitudes, and perceptions in a choice context between BRT and metro," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 452-465.
    19. Antonio Borriello & John M. Rose, 2021. "Global versus localised attitudinal responses in discrete choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 131-165, February.
    20. Yang, Jui-Chen & Johnson, F. Reed & Kilambi, Vikram & Mohamed, Ateesha F., 2015. "Sample size and utility-difference precision in discrete-choice experiments: A meta-simulation approach," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 50-57.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:47:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11116-018-9891-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.