The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity
The mixed or heterogeneous multinomial logit (MIXL) model has become popular in a number of fields, especially marketing, health economics, and industrial organization. In most applications of the model, the vector of consumer utility weights on product attributes is assumed to have a multivariate normal (MVN) distribution in the population. Thus, some consumers care more about some attributes than others, and the IIA property of multinomial logit (MNL) is avoided (i.e., segments of consumers will tend to switch among the subset of brands that possess their most valued attributes). The MIXL model is also appealing because it is relatively easy to estimate. Recently, however, some researchers have argued that the MVN is a poor choice for modelling taste heterogeneity. They argue that much of the heterogeneity in attribute weights is accounted for by a pure scale effect (i.e., across consumers, all attribute weights are scaled up or down in tandem). This implies that choice behaviour is simply more random for some consumers than others (i.e., holding attribute coefficients fixed, the scale of their error term is greater). This leads to a “scale heterogeneity” MNL model (S-MNL). Here, we develop a generalized multinomial logit model (G-MNL) that nests S-MNL and MIXL. By estimating the S-MNL, MIXL, and G-MNL models on 10 data sets, we provide evidence on their relative performance. We find that models that account for scale heterogeneity (i.e., G-MNL or S-MNL) are preferred to MIXL by the Bayes and consistent Akaike information criteria in all 10 data sets. Accounting for scale heterogeneity enables one to account for “extreme” consumers who exhibit nearly lexicographic preferences, as well as consumers who exhibit very “random” behaviour (in a sense we formalize below).
Volume (Year): 29 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (05-06)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA|
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Fang, Hanming & Keane, Michael & Silverman, Dan, 2006.
"Sources of Advantageous Selection: Evidence from the Medigap Insurance Market,"
17, Yale University, Department of Economics.
- Hanming Fang & Michael P. Keane & Dan Silverman, 2008. "Sources of Advantageous Selection: Evidence from the Medigap Insurance Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(2), pages 303-350, 04.
- Hanming Fang & Michael P. Keane & Dan Silverman, 2006. "Sources of Advantageous Selection: Evidence from the Medigap Insurance Market," NBER Working Papers 12289, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- M. Keane & R. Moffitt, .
"A structural model of multiple welfare program participation and labor supply,"
Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers
1080-96, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
- Keane, Michael & Moffitt, Robert, 1998. "A Structural Model of Multiple Welfare Program Participation and Labor Supply," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(3), pages 553-89, August.
- M. Keane & R. Mofitt, 1995. "A Structural Model of Multiple Welfare Program Participation and Labor Supply," Working Papers 95-4, Brown University, Department of Economics.
- Michael P. Keane & Robert A. Moffitt, 1995. "A structural model of multiple welfare program participation and labor supply," Working Papers 557, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
- Elrod, Terry & Keane, Michael, 1995. "A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data," MPRA Paper 52434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Burda, Martin & Harding, Matthew & Hausman, Jerry, 2008.
"A Bayesian mixed logit-probit model for multinomial choice,"
Journal of Econometrics,
Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 232-246, December.
- Martin Burda & Matthew Harding & Jerry Hausman, 2008. "A Bayesian mixed logit-probit model for multinomial choice," CeMMAP working papers CWP23/08, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Bartels, R. & Fiebig, D.G. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2003.
"Consumers and Experts : An Econometric Analysis of the Demand for Water Heaters,"
2003-26, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Robert Bartels & Denzil Fiebig & Arthur Soest, 2006. "Consumers and experts: an econometric analysis of the demand for water heaters," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 369-391, June.
- Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
- Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
- Geweke, John F. & Keane, Michael P. & Runkle, David E., 1997.
"Statistical inference in the multinomial multiperiod probit model,"
Journal of Econometrics,
Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 125-165, September.
- John F. Geweke & Michael P. Keane & David E. Runkle, 1994. "Statistical inference in the multinomial multiperiod probit model," Staff Report 177, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Geweke, John & Keane, Michael, 2007. "Smoothly mixing regressions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 252-290, May.
- Hall, Jane & Fiebig, Denzil G. & King, Madeleine T. & Hossain, Ishrat & Louviere, Jordan J., 2006. "What influences participation in genetic carrier testing?: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 520-537, May.
- Cameron, Trudy Ann & Poe, Gregory L. & Ethier, Robert G. & Schulze, William D., 2002. "Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 391-425, November.
- Kenneth A. Small & Clifford Winston & Jia Yan, 2005. "Uncovering the Distribution of Motorists' Preferences for Travel Time and Reliability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1367-1382, 07.
- Harris, Katherine M. & Keane, Michael P., 1998. "A model of health plan choice:: Inferring preferences and perceptions from a combination of revealed preference and attitudinal data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 131-157, November.
- Keane, Michael P, 1994. "A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimator for Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 95-116, January.
- Allenby, Greg M. & Rossi, Peter E., 1998. "Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 57-78, November.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:29:y:2010:i:3:p:393-421. 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: (Mirko Janc)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.