IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v215y2024ics0167715224001998.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods for testing the random utility model

Author

Listed:
  • Forcina, Antonio
  • Dardanoni, Valentino

Abstract

The Random Utility Model, central in stochastic choice theory, is equivalent to assume that a probability vector belongs to a convex cone. We investigate its underlying geometry, introduce two new testing procedures, and compare them by simulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Forcina, Antonio & Dardanoni, Valentino, 2024. "Methods for testing the random utility model," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:215:y:2024:i:c:s0167715224001998
    DOI: 10.1016/j.spl.2024.110230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167715224001998
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.spl.2024.110230?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. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1883-1909, November.
    2. Matias D. Cattaneo & Xinwei Ma & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2020. "A Random Attention Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(7), pages 2796-2836.
    3. Daniel L. McFadden, 2006. "Revealed stochastic preference: a synthesis," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Rosa L. Matzkin & Daniel L. McFadden & James C. Moore & Nicholas C. Yann (ed.), Rationality and Equilibrium, pages 1-20, Springer.
    4. William J McCausland & Clintin Davis-Stober & AAJ Marley & Sanghyuk Park & Nicholas Brown, 2020. "Testing the Random Utility Hypothesis Directly," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(625), pages 183-207.
    5. Evans, R.J. & Forcina, A., 2013. "Two algorithms for fitting constrained marginal models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 1-7.
    6. Donald W. K. Andrews & Gustavo Soares, 2010. "Inference for Parameters Defined by Moment Inequalities Using Generalized Moment Selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 119-157, January.
    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. Molinari, Francesca, 2020. "Microeconometrics with partial identification," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Steven N. Durlauf & Lars Peter Hansen & James J. Heckman & Rosa L. Matzkin (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 7, chapter 0, pages 355-486, Elsevier.
    2. Kashaev, Nail & Aguiar, Victor H., 2022. "A random attention and utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    3. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & Rock, Bram De, 2019. "Bounding counterfactual demand with unobserved heterogeneity and endogenous expenditures," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 483-506.
    4. Daniele Caliari & Henrik Petri, 2024. "Irrational Random Utility Models," Papers 2403.10208, arXiv.org.
    5. Matias D. Cattaneo & Xinwei Ma & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2020. "A Random Attention Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(7), pages 2796-2836.
    6. Levon Barseghyan & Maura Coughlin & Francesca Molinari & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2021. "Heterogeneous Choice Sets and Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2015-2048, September.
    7. Mark Dean & Dilip Ravindran & Jorg Stoye, 2022. "A Better Test of Choice Overload," Papers 2212.03931, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    8. David M. Kaplan, 2015. "Bayesian and frequentist tests of sign equality and other nonlinear inequalities," Working Papers 1516, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    9. Rahul Deb & Yuichi Kitamura & John K H Quah & Jörg Stoye, 2023. "Revealed Price Preference: Theory and Empirical Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(2), pages 707-743.
    10. Nobuo Koida & Koji Shirai, 2024. "A dual approach to nonparametric characterization for random utility models," Papers 2403.04328, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    11. Victor H. Aguiar & Maria Jose Boccardi & Nail Kashaev & Jeongbin Kim, 2023. "Random utility and limited consideration," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(1), pages 71-116, January.
    12. Caliari, Daniele, 2023. "Behavioural welfare analysis and revealed preference: Theory and experimental evidence," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2023-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    13. Kaplan, David M. & Zhuo, Longhao, 2021. "Frequentist properties of Bayesian inequality tests," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 221(1), pages 312-336.
    14. Francesca Molinari, 2019. "Econometrics with Partial Identification," CeMMAP working papers CWP25/19, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    15. Ariel Pakes & Jack Porter, 2024. "Moment inequalities for multinomial choice with fixed effects," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, January.
    16. Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Kengo Kato, 2013. "Testing Many Moment Inequalities," CeMMAP working papers 65/13, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    17. Demet Yilmazkuday & Hakan Yilmazkuday, 2017. "The role of direct flights in trade costs," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(2), pages 249-270, May.
    18. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2013. "Nonparametric analysis of random utility models: testing," CeMMAP working papers 36/13, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    19. Menzel, Konrad, 2014. "Consistent estimation with many moment inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 329-350.
    20. Steven T Berry & Giovanni Compiani, 2023. "An Instrumental Variable Approach to Dynamic Models," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(4), pages 1724-1758.

    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:stapro:v:215:y:2024:i:c:s0167715224001998. 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.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    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.