IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v44y2017i1d10.1007_s11116-015-9626-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation of multinomial probit-kernel integrated choice and latent variable model: comparison on one sequential and two simultaneous approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Xuemei Fu

    () (Shanghai Jiao Tong University)

  • Zhicai Juan

    () (Shanghai Jiao Tong University)

Abstract

Abstract Integrated choice and latent variable (ICLV) model incorporates latent factors into standard discrete choice model with aim to provide greater explanatory power. Using simulated datasets, this study makes a comparison among three estimation approaches corresponding to the sequential approach and two simultaneous approaches including the maximum simulated likelihood with GHK estimator and maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) approach, to evaluate their abilities to recover the underlying parameters of multinomial probit-kernel ICLV model. The results show that both simultaneous approaches outperform the sequential approach in terms of estimates accuracy and efficiency irrespective of the sample sizes, and the MACML approach is the most preferable due to its best performance on recovering true values of parameters with relatively small standard errors, especially when the sample size is large enough.

Suggested Citation

  • Xuemei Fu & Zhicai Juan, 2017. "Estimation of multinomial probit-kernel integrated choice and latent variable model: comparison on one sequential and two simultaneous approaches," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 91-116, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:44:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11116-015-9626-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-015-9626-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-015-9626-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Vredin Johansson, Maria & Heldt, Tobias & Johansson, Per, 2006. "The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 507-525, July.
    2. Ricardo Daziano & Denis Bolduc, 2013. "Covariance, identification, and finite-sample performance of the MSL and Bayes estimators of a logit model with latent attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 647-670, May.
    3. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2006. "Calculation of multivariate normal probabilities by simulation, with applications to maximum simulated likelihood estimation," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(2), pages 156-189, June.
    4. Keane, Michael P, 1994. "A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimator for Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 95-116, January.
    5. Geweke, John & Keane, Michael P & Runkle, David, 1994. "Alternative Computational Approaches to Inference in the Multinomial Probit Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 609-632, November.
    6. Elisabetta Cherchi & Juan Dios Ortúzar, 2008. "Empirical Identification in the Mixed Logit Model: Analysing the Effect of Data Richness," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 109-124, September.
    7. Borsch-Supan, Axel & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A., 1993. "Smooth unbiased multivariate probability simulators for maximum likelihood estimation of limited dependent variable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 347-368, August.
    8. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    9. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, December.
    10. Gibson, Fiona L. & Burton, Michael P., 2009. "Biased estimates in discrete choice models: the appropriate inclusion of psychometric data into the valuation of recycled wastewater," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 47943, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    12. Bhat, Chandra R., 2011. "The maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimation of multinomial probit-based unordered response choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 923-939, August.
    13. Murphy, Kevin M & Topel, Robert H, 2002. "Estimation and Inference in Two-Step Econometric Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 88-97, January.
    14. Walker, Joan & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2002. "Generalized random utility model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 303-343, July.
    15. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sidharthan, Raghuprasad, 2011. "A simulation evaluation of the maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimator for mixed multinomial probit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 940-953, August.
    16. Bhat, Chandra R. & Dubey, Subodh K., 2014. "A new estimation approach to integrate latent psychological constructs in choice modeling," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 68-85.
    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. Piatek, Rémi & Gensowski, Miriam, 2017. "A Multinomial Probit Model with Latent Factors: Identification and Interpretation without a Measurement System," IZA Discussion Papers 11042, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    2. repec:eee:transb:v:109:y:2018:i:c:p:238-256 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:transp:v:44:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11116-015-9626-x. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Andrew Huffard) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Andrew Huffard to update the entry or send us the correct email address. General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.