IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/qmktec/v4y2006i3p241-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bayesian estimation of multivariate-normal models when dimensions are absent

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Zeithammer
  • Peter Lenk

Abstract

Multivariate economic and business data frequently suffer from a missing data phenomenon that has not been sufficiently explored in the literature: both the independent and dependent variables for one or more dimensions are absent for some of the observational units. For example, in choice based conjoint studies, not all brands are available for consideration on every choice task. In this case, the analyst lacks information on both the response and predictor variables because the underlying stimuli, the excluded brands, are absent. This situation differs from the usual missing data problem where some of the independent variables or dependent variables are missing at random or by a known mechanism, and the “holes” in the data-set can be imputed from the joint distribution of the data. When dimensions are absent, data imputation may not be a well-poised question, especially in designed experiments. One consequence of absent dimensions is that the standard Bayesian analysis of the multi-dimensional covariances structure becomes difficult because of the absent dimensions. This paper proposes a simple error augmentation scheme that simplifies the analysis and facilitates the estimation of the full covariance structure. An application to a choice-based conjoint experiment illustrates the methodology and demonstrates that naive approaches to circumvent absent dimensions lead to substantially distorted and misleading inferences. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Zeithammer & Peter Lenk, 2006. "Bayesian estimation of multivariate-normal models when dimensions are absent," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 241-265, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:qmktec:v:4:y:2006:i:3:p:241-265
    DOI: 10.1007/s11129-005-9006-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11129-005-9006-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11129-005-9006-5?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. Michael D. Smith & Erik Brynjolfsson, 2001. "Consumer Decision-making at an Internet Shopbot: Brand Still Matters," NBER Chapters, in: E-commerce, pages 541-558, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-426, March.
    3. McCulloch, Robert E. & Polson, Nicholas G. & Rossi, Peter E., 2000. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model with fully identified parameters," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 173-193, November.
    4. Allenby, Greg M & Lenk, Peter J, 1995. "Reassessing Brand Loyalty, Price Sensitivity, and Merchandising Effects on Consumer Brand Choice," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(3), pages 281-289, July.
    5. McCulloch, Robert & Rossi, Peter E., 1994. "An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-2), pages 207-240.
    6. Rinus Haaijer & Michel Wedel & Marco Vriens & Tom Wansbeek, 1998. "Utility Covariances and Context Effects in Conjoint MNP Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252.
    7. repec:bla:jindec:v:49:y:2001:i:4:p:541-58 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Imai, Kosuke & van Dyk, David A., 2005. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model using marginal data augmentation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 311-334, February.
    10. Michael D. Gordon & Peter Lenk, 1991. "A utility theoretic examination of the probability ranking principle in information retrieval," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 42(10), pages 703-714, December.
    11. Peter J. Lenk & Wayne S. DeSarbo & Paul E. Green & Martin R. Young, 1996. "Hierarchical Bayes Conjoint Analysis: Recovery of Partworth Heterogeneity from Reduced Experimental Designs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 173-191.
    12. Allenby, Greg M. & Rossi, Peter E., 1998. "Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 57-78, November.
    13. Peter Lenk & Wayne DeSarbo, 2000. "Bayesian inference for finite mixtures of generalized linear models with random effects," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(1), pages 93-119, 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. Nikolaus Hautsch & Fuyu Yang, 2014. "Bayesian Stochastic Search for the Best Predictors: Nowcasting GDP Growth," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 056, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    2. Anindita Chakravarty & Rajdeep Grewal, 2011. "The Stock Market in the Driver's Seat! Implications for R&D and Marketing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1594-1609, March.
    3. Alexandre Belloni & Mitchell J. Lovett & William Boulding & Richard Staelin, 2012. "Optimal Admission and Scholarship Decisions: Choosing Customized Marketing Offers to Attract a Desirable Mix of Customers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 621-636, July.
    4. Lynd Bacon & Peter Lenk, 2012. "Augmenting discrete-choice data to identify common preference scales for inter-subject analyses," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 453-474, December.
    5. Hee Mok Park & Puneet Manchanda, 2015. "When Harry Bet with Sally: An Empirical Analysis of Multiple Peer Effects in Casino Gambling Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 179-194, March.
    6. Zhehan Jiang & Jonathan Templin, 2019. "Gibbs Samplers for Logistic Item Response Models via the Pólya–Gamma Distribution: A Computationally Efficient Data-Augmentation Strategy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(2), pages 358-374, June.
    7. Sanghak Lee & Greg M. Allenby, 2014. "Modeling Indivisible Demand," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 364-381, May.
    8. Peter Lenk, 2014. "Bayesian estimation of random utility models," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 20, pages 457-497, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Eleanor McDonnell Feit & Mark A. Beltramo & Fred M. Feinberg, 2010. "Reality Check: Combining Choice Experiments with Market Data to Estimate the Importance of Product Attributes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 785-800, May.
    10. Subramanian Balachander & Bikram Ghosh, 2013. "Bayesian estimation of a simultaneous probit model using error augmentation: An application to multi-buying and churning behavior," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 437-458, December.
    11. Yu-Cheng Ku & Tsun-Feng Chiang & Sheng-Mao Chang, 2017. "Is what you choose what you want?—outlier detection in choice-based conjoint analysis," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 29-42, March.
    12. Ku, Yu-Cheng & Wu, John, 2018. "Measuring respondent uncertainty in discrete choice experiments via utility suppression," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 1-18.
    13. Subramanian Balachander & Bikram Ghosh, 2013. "Bayesian estimation of a simultaneous probit model using error augmentation: An application to multi-buying and churning behavior," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 437-458, December.

    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. Peter E. Rossi & Greg M. Allenby, 2003. "Bayesian Statistics and Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 304-328, July.
    2. Mohamed Lachaab & Asim Ansari & Kamel Jedidi & Abdelwahed Trabelsi, 2006. "Modeling preference evolution in discrete choice models: A Bayesian state-space approach," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 57-81, March.
    3. Zhang, Xiao & Boscardin, W. John & Belin, Thomas R., 2008. "Bayesian analysis of multivariate nominal measures using multivariate multinomial probit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 3697-3708, March.
    4. Lynd Bacon & Peter Lenk, 2012. "Augmenting discrete-choice data to identify common preference scales for inter-subject analyses," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 453-474, December.
    5. DeSarbo, Wayne S. & Kim, Youngchan & Wedel, Michel & Fong, Duncan K. H., 1998. "A Bayesian approach to the spatial representation of market structure from consumer choice data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 285-305, December.
    6. Piatek, Rémi & Gensowski, Miriam, 2017. "A Multinomial Probit Model with Latent Factors: Identification and Interpretation without a Measurement System," IZA Discussion Papers 11042, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Peter Lenk, 2014. "Bayesian estimation of random utility models," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 20, pages 457-497, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Duncan Fong & Sunghoon Kim & Zhe Chen & Wayne DeSarbo, 2016. "A Bayesian Multinomial Probit MODEL FOR THE ANALYSIS OF PANEL CHOICE DATA," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 161-183, March.
    9. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    10. Rub'en Loaiza-Maya & Didier Nibbering, 2022. "Fast variational Bayes methods for multinomial probit models," Papers 2202.12495, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    11. Friederike Paetz & Winfried J. Steiner, 2017. "The benefits of incorporating utility dependencies in finite mixture probit models," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 39(3), pages 793-819, July.
    12. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2007. "Discrete Choice Models With Multiple Unobserved Choice Characteristics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1159-1192, November.
    13. Daziano, Ricardo A., 2015. "Inference on mode preferences, vehicle purchases, and the energy paradox using a Bayesian structural choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-26.
    14. Erik Meijer & Jan Rouwendal, 2006. "Measuring welfare effects in models with random coefficients," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(2), pages 227-244, March.
    15. Raja Chakir & Olivier Parent, 2009. "Determinants of land use changes: A spatial multinomial probit approach," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(2), pages 327-344, June.
    16. repec:dgr:rugsom:00f25 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. 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.
    18. Moffa, Giusi & Kuipers, Jack, 2014. "Sequential Monte Carlo EM for multivariate probit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 252-272.
    19. Ricardo A. Daziano & Martin Achtnicht, 2014. "Forecasting Adoption of Ultra-Low-Emission Vehicles Using Bayes Estimates of a Multinomial Probit Model and the GHK Simulator," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 671-683, November.
    20. Chiew, Esther & Daziano, Ricardo A., 2016. "A Bayes multinomial probit model for random consumer-surplus maximization," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 56-59.
    21. Zsolt Sándor & Michel Wedel, 2002. "Profile Construction in Experimental Choice Designs for Mixed Logit Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 455-475, February.

    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:kap:qmktec:v:4:y:2006:i:3:p:241-265. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.