IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v29y2018icp133-151.html

Bayesian estimation of mixed logit models: Selecting an appropriate prior for the covariance matrix

Author

Listed:
  • Akinc, Deniz
  • Vandebroek, Martina

Abstract

Maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation are both frequently used to fit mixed logit models to choice data. The type and the number of quasi-random draws used for simulating the likelihood and the choice of the priors in Bayesian estimation have a big impact on the estimates. We compare the different approaches and compute the relative root mean square errors of the resulting estimates for the mean, covariance matrix and individual parameters in a large simulation study. We focus on the prior for the covariance matrix in Bayesian estimation and investigate the effect of Inverse Wishart priors, the Separation Strategy, Scaled Inverse Wishart and Huang Half-t priors. We show that the default settings in many software packages can lead to very unreliable results and that it is important to check the robustness of the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Akinc, Deniz & Vandebroek, Martina, 2018. "Bayesian estimation of mixed logit models: Selecting an appropriate prior for the covariance matrix," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 133-151.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:29:y:2018:i:c:p:133-151
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2017.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534517301203
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2017.11.004?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sándor, Zsolt & Train, Kenneth, 2004. "Quasi-random simulation of discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 313-327, May.
    2. Regier, Dean A. & Ryan, Mandy & Phimister, Euan & Marra, Carlo A., 2009. "Bayesian and classical estimation of mixed logit: An application to genetic testing," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 598-610, May.
    3. Arora, Neeraj & Huber, Joel, 2001. "Improving Parameter Estimates and Model Prediction by Aggregate Customization in Choice Experiments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(2), pages 273-283, September.
    4. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    5. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    6. Ossama Elshiewy & German Zenetti & Yasemin Boztug, 2017. "Differences Between Classical and Bayesian Estimates for Mixed Logit Models: A Replication Study," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 470-476, March.
    7. Balcombe, Kelvin & Chalak, Ali & Fraser, Iain, 2009. "Model selection for the mixed logit with Bayesian estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 226-237, March.
    8. O’Malley, A. James & Zaslavsky, Alan M., 2008. "Domain-Level Covariance Analysis for Multilevel Survey Data With Structured Nonresponse," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(484), pages 1405-1418.
    9. Lewandowski, Daniel & Kurowicka, Dorota & Joe, Harry, 2009. "Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(9), pages 1989-2001, October.
    10. Huber, Joel & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7zm4f51b, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    11. Peter Haan & Daniel Kemptner & Arne Uhlendorff, 2015. "Bayesian procedures as a numerical tool for the estimation of an intertemporal discrete choice model," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1123-1141, November.
    12. Peter E. Rossi & Robert E. McCulloch & Greg M. Allenby, 1996. "The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 321-340.
    13. Yu, Jie & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2010. "Comparing different sampling schemes for approximating the integrals involved in the efficient design of stated choice experiments," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1268-1289, December.
    14. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, Enero-Abr.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kassie, Girma T. & Zeleke, Fresenbet & Birhanu, Mulugeta Y. & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2020. "Reminder Nudge, Attribute Nonattendance, and Willingness to Pay in a Discrete Choice Experiment," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304208, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    3. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Budziński, Wiktor, 2019. "Simulation error in maximum likelihood estimation of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 73-85.
    4. Cherchi, Elisabetta & Guevara, Cristian Angelo, 2012. "A Monte Carlo experiment to analyze the curse of dimensionality in estimating random coefficients models with a full variance–covariance matrix," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 321-332.
    5. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 720-734, July.
    6. Junyi Shen, 2009. "Latent class model or mixed logit model? A comparison by transport mode choice data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(22), pages 2915-2924.
    7. Prateek Bansal & Vahid Keshavarzzadeh & Angelo Guevara & Shanjun Li & Ricardo A Daziano, 2022. "Designed quadrature to approximate integrals in maximum simulated likelihood estimation [Evaluating simulation-based approaches and multivariate quadrature on sparse grids in estimating multivariate binary probit models]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 301-321.
    8. Francisco Javier Amador & Rosa Marina González & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2004. "Preference heterogeneity and willingness to pay for travel time," Documentos de trabajo conjunto ULL-ULPGC 2004-12, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la ULPGC.
    9. Łukawska, Mirosława & Jensen, Anders Fjendbo & Rodrigues, Filipe, 2025. "Context-aware Bayesian mixed multinomial logit model," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    10. Alexander Staus, 2008. "Standard and Shuffled Halton Sequences in a Mixed Logit Model," Hohenheimer Agrarökonomische Arbeitsberichte 17, University of Hohenheim, Institute for Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    11. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    12. Landmann, D. & Feil, J.-H. & Lagerkvist, C.J. & Otter, V., 2018. "Designing capacity development activities of small-scale farmers in developing countries based on discrete choice experiments," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277738, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Falco, Paolo & Maloney, William F. & Rijkers, Bob & Sarrias, Mauricio, 2015. "Heterogeneity in subjective wellbeing: An application to occupational allocation in Africa," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 137-153.
    14. Ana I. Sanjuán‐López & Helena Resano‐Ezcaray, 2020. "Labels for a Local Food Speciality Product: The Case of Saffron," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 778-797, September.
    15. Grigolon, Anna B. & Borgers, Aloys W.J. & Kemperman, Astrid D.A.M. & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2014. "Vacation length choice: A dynamic mixed multinomial logit model," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 158-167.
    16. Xiaodong Gong & Robert Breunig, 2017. "Childcare Assistance: Are Subsidies or Tax Credits Better?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 38, pages 7-48, March.
    17. Stefanie Heinzle, 2012. "Disclosure of Energy Operating Cost Information: A Silver Bullet for Overcoming the Energy-Efficiency Gap?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 43-64, March.
    18. Santos, Rui & Clemente, Pedro & Brouwer, Roy & Antunes, Paula & Pinto, Rute, 2015. "Landowner preferences for agri-environmental agreements to conserve the montado ecosystem in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 159-167.
    19. Max J. Pachali & Peter Kurz & Thomas Otter, 2020. "How to generalize from a hierarchical model?," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 343-380, December.
    20. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:eejocm:v:29:y:2018:i:c:p:133-151. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    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.