IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v9y2013icp27-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A mixed random utility — Random regret model linking the choice of decision rule to latent character traits

Author

Listed:
  • Hess, Stephane
  • Stathopoulos, Amanda

Abstract

An increasing number of studies are concerned with the use of alternatives to random utility maximisation as a decision rule in choice models, with a particular emphasis on regret minimisation over the last few years. The initial focus was on revealing which paradigm fits best for a given dataset, while later studies have looked at variation in decision rules across respondents within a dataset. However, only limited effort has gone towards understanding the potential drivers of decision rules, i.e. what makes it more or less likely that the choices of a given respondent can be explained by a particular paradigm. The present paper puts forward the notion that unobserved character traits can be a key source of this type of heterogeneity and proposes to characterise these traits through a latent variable within a hybrid framework. In an empirical application on stated choice data, we make use of a mixed random utility-random regret structure, where the allocation to a given class is driven in part by a latent variable which at the same time explains respondents' stated satisfaction with their real world commute journey. Results reveal a linkage between the likely decision rule and the stated satisfaction with the real world commute conditions. Notably, the most regret-prone respondents in our sample are more likely to have aligned their real-life commute performance more closely with their aspirational values.

Suggested Citation

  • Hess, Stephane & Stathopoulos, Amanda, 2013. "A mixed random utility — Random regret model linking the choice of decision rule to latent character traits," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 27-38.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:9:y:2013:i:c:p:27-38
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2013.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534513000626
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Crowe, Ellen & Higgins, E. Tory, 1997. "Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations: Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 117-132, February.
    2. Chorus, Caspar G. & Arentze, Theo A. & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2008. "A Random Regret-Minimization model of travel choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Stephane Hess & Amanda Stathopoulos & Andrew Daly, 2012. "Allowing for heterogeneous decision rules in discrete choice models: an approach and four case studies," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 565-591, May.
    4. Stathopoulos, Amanda & Hess, Stephane, 2012. "Revisiting reference point formation, gains–losses asymmetry and non-linear sensitivities with an emphasis on attribute specific treatment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1673-1689.
    5. Swait, Joffre, 2001. "A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 903-928, November.
    6. Caspar Chorus & Michel Bierlaire, 2013. "An empirical comparison of travel choice models that capture preferences for compromise alternatives," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 549-562, May.
    7. Caspar G Chorus & John M Rose & David A Hensher, 2013. "Regret Minimization or Utility Maximization: It Depends on the Attribute," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(1), pages 154-169, February.
    8. 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.
    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. Laura-Lucia Richter & Melvyn Weeks, 2016. "Flexible Mixed Logit with Posterior Analysis: Exploring Willingness-to-Pay for Grid Resilience," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1631, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. repec:eee:transb:v:101:y:2017:i:c:p:72-88 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:eee:eejocm:v:24:y:2017:i:c:p:4-21 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Chorus, Caspar G. & Kroesen, Maarten, 2014. "On the (im-)possibility of deriving transport policy implications from hybrid choice models," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 217-222.
    5. Chorus, Caspar G., 2014. "A Generalized Random Regret Minimization model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 224-238.
    6. van Cranenburgh, Sander & Guevara, Cristian Angelo & Chorus, Caspar G., 2015. "New insights on random regret minimization models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 91-109.
    7. repec:eee:transb:v:107:y:2018:i:c:p:18-40 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Laura-Lucia Richter & Michael G. Pollitt, 2016. "Which Smart Electricity Service Contracts Will Consumers Accept? The demand for compensation in a platform market," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1632, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    9. 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.

    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:9:y:2013:i:c:p:27-38. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.