IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v199y2025ics0191261525001134.html

A random utility maximisation model considering the information search process

Author

Listed:
  • Nova, Gabriel
  • Guevara, C. Angelo
  • Hess, Stephane
  • Hancock, Thomas O.

Abstract

Discrete choice analysis aims to understand and predict decision-makers’ behaviour, a goal that is crucial across several disciplines, including transportation. This type of analysis has relied predominantly on static representations of preferences, principally through the Random Utility Maximisation (RUM) model, due to its ease of implementation, economic interpretability, and statistical formality. However, this model assumes that individuals possess complete information about all attributes of alternatives and that they can process and recall this information instantaneously, which may not align with actual human behaviour. In contrast, the Decision Field Theory (DFT) model from mathematical psychology explicitly incorporates the repeated scrutiny of attributes and recall effects within the decision-making process, which enables it to model attention weights, but lacks microeconomic interpretability and clear statistical parameter identification. This paper introduces the RUM-DFT model, which seeks to integrate strengths of both approaches. Through Monte Carlo simulations, the proposed model is shown to be able to: (i) recover parameters related to the deliberation process, (ii) replicate the dynamic behaviour of utilities during deliberation as observed in practice, (iii) maintain economic interpretability by estimating coefficients that can be used to calculate the marginal indirect utilities, and (iv) highlight the pitfalls of using a RUM model that disregards the true dynamics of data generation process. The SwissMetro case study is employed also to evaluate the RUM-DFT model using a real-world dataset, demonstrating the viability and superior goodness-of-fit of the proposed model.

Suggested Citation

  • Nova, Gabriel & Guevara, C. Angelo & Hess, Stephane & Hancock, Thomas O., 2025. "A random utility maximisation model considering the information search process," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:199:y:2025:i:c:s0191261525001134
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2025.103264
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261525001134
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2025.103264?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. Rust, John, 1987. "Optimal Replacement of GMC Bus Engines: An Empirical Model of Harold Zurcher," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(5), pages 999-1033, September.
    2. C. Angelo Guevara, 2024. "Endogeneity in discrete choice models," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 23, pages 668-692, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, Enero-Abr.
    4. Small, Kenneth A & Rosen, Harvey S, 1981. "Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 105-130, January.
    5. Busemeyer, Jerome R. & Townsend, James T., 1992. "Fundamental derivations from decision field theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 255-282, June.
    6. Guevara, C. Angelo, 2015. "Critical assessment of five methods to correct for endogeneity in discrete-choice models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 240-254.
    7. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson & Guillermo Moloche & Stephen Weinberg, 2006. "Costly Information Acquisition: Experimental Analysis of a Boundedly Rational Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1043-1068, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Sergio R. Jara-Diaz & Cristián A. Guevara, 2003. "Behind the Subjective Value of Travel Time Savings," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 37(1), pages 29-46, January.
    10. Gao, Song & Frejinger, Emma & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2011. "Cognitive cost in route choice with real-time information: An exploratory analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 916-926, November.
    11. Mullen, Katharine M. & Ardia, David & Gil, David L. & Windover, Donald & Cline, James, 2011. "DEoptim: An R Package for Global Optimization by Differential Evolution," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 40(i06).
    12. Guevara, C. Angelo & Tang, Yue & Gao, Song, 2018. "The initial condition problem with complete history dependency in learning models for travel choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 850-861.
    13. 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.
    14. Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly, 2024. "Introduction to the Handbook of Choice Modelling," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 1, pages 1-4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Marley, A.A.J. & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2021. "An accumulation of preference: Two alternative dynamic models for understanding transport choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 250-282.
    17. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2018. "Decision field theory: Improvements to current methodology and comparisons with standard choice modelling techniques," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 18-40.
    18. Ruud, Paul A, 1983. "Sufficient Conditions for the Consistency of Maximum Likelihood Estimation Despite Misspecifications of Distribution in Multinomial Discrete Choice Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(1), pages 225-228, January.
    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. Henriquez-Jara, Bastian & Guevara, C. Angelo, 2026. "Evidence of intertemporal bias in a stated preferences route choice experiment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    2. Thomas O. Hancock & Stephane Hess & Charisma F. Choudhury, 2025. "Beyond utility: incorporating eye-tracking, skin conductance and heart rate data into cognitive and econometric travel behaviour models," Papers 2506.18068, arXiv.org.

    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. Henriquez-Jara, Bastian & Guevara, C. Angelo, 2025. "An Experience-Based Choice Model (EBCM): Formulation, identification, behavioural insights and well-being assessment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    2. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Tsoleridis, Panagiotis, 2024. "Decision field theory: An extension for real-world settings," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    3. Hancock, Thomas O. & Broekaert, Jan & Hess, Stephane & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2020. "Quantum probability: A new method for modelling travel behaviour," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 165-198.
    4. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    5. John Buckell & Vrinda Vasavada & Sarah Wordsworth & Dean A. Regier & Matthew Quaife, 2022. "Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 363-381, February.
    6. Guevara, C. Angelo, 2018. "Overidentification tests for the exogeneity of instruments in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 241-253.
    7. 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).
    8. Szép, Teodóra & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Chorus, Caspar G., 2022. "Decision Field Theory: Equivalence with probit models and guidance for identifiability," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    9. Staudigel, Matthias & Oehlmann, Malte & Roosen, Jutta, 2024. "Demand effects of unilateral versus industry-wide sugar reduction scenarios," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    10. Gopalakrishnan, Raja & Guevara, C. Angelo & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2020. "Combining multiple imputation and control function methods to deal with missing data and endogeneity in discrete-choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 45-57.
    11. Alwosheel, Ahmad & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Chorus, Caspar G., 2018. "Is your dataset big enough? Sample size requirements when using artificial neural networks for discrete choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 167-182.
    12. Rambha, Tarun & Nozick, Linda K. & Davidson, Rachel, 2021. "Modeling hurricane evacuation behavior using a dynamic discrete choice framework," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 75-100.
    13. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Marley, A.A.J. & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2021. "An accumulation of preference: Two alternative dynamic models for understanding transport choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 250-282.
    14. Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly & Richard Batley, 2018. "Revisiting consistency with random utility maximisation: theory and implications for practical work," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(2), pages 181-204, March.
    15. Poudel, Niranjan & Singleton, Patrick A., 2024. "Willingness to pay for changes in travel time and work time: A stated choice experiment of US commuters," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    16. Park, Arim & Chen, Roger & Cho, Soohyun & Zhao, Yao, 2023. "The determinants of online matching platforms for freight services," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    17. Schmid, Basil & Molloy, Joseph & Peer, Stefanie & Jokubauskaite, Simona & Aschauer, Florian & Hössinger, Reinhard & Gerike, Regine & Jara-Diaz, Sergio R. & Axhausen, Kay W., 2021. "The value of travel time savings and the value of leisure in Zurich: Estimation, decomposition and policy implications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 186-215.
    18. Gabriel Nova & Sander van Cranenburgh & Stephane Hess, 2024. "Understanding the decision-making process of choice modellers," Papers 2411.01704, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
    19. van Cranenburgh, Sander & Collins, Andrew T., 2019. "New software tools for creating stated choice experimental designs efficient for regret minimisation and utility maximisation decision rules," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 104-123.
    20. Guerrero B., Thomas E. & Avogadro, Nicolò & Ramos, Raúl, 2025. "Control Function Approach for Addressing Endogeneity in Transport Models: A Case Study on the London–Amsterdam Route," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).

    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:transb:v:199:y:2025:i:c:s0191261525001134. 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/548/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.