IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v43y2012i3p1353-1372.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of SML and GMM estimators for the random coefficient logit model using aggregate data

Author

Listed:
  • Sungho Park

    ()

  • Sachin Gupta

    ()

Abstract

A simulated maximum likelihood (SML) estimator for the random coefficient logit model using aggregate data is found to be more efficient than the widely used generalized method of moments estimator (GMM) of Berry et al. (Econometrica 63:841–890, 1995 ). In particular, the SML estimator is better than the GMM estimator in recovery of heterogeneity parameters which are often of central interest in marketing research. With the GMM estimator, the analyst must determine what moment conditions to use for parameter identification, especially the heterogeneity parameters. With the SML estimator, the moment conditions are automatically determined as the gradients of the log-likelihood function, and these are the most efficient ones if the model is correctly specified. Another limitation of the GMM estimator is that the product market shares must be strictly positive while the SML estimator can handle zero market share observations. Properties of the SML and GMM estimators are demonstrated in simulated data and in data from the US photographic film market. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Sungho Park & Sachin Gupta, 2012. "Comparison of SML and GMM estimators for the random coefficient logit model using aggregate data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 1353-1372, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:43:y:2012:i:3:p:1353-1372
    DOI: 10.1007/s00181-011-0519-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00181-011-0519-3
    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. Wu, De-Min, 1973. "Alternative Tests of Independence Between Stochastic Regressors and Disturbances," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 733-750, July.
    2. K. Sudhir & Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Vrinda Kadiyali, 2005. "Time-Varying Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 96-109, September.
    3. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, January.
    4. David Besanko & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Sachin Gupta, 2003. "Competitive Price Discrimination Strategies in a Vertical Channel Using Aggregate Retail Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1121-1138, September.
    5. Heckman, James J, 1978. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 931-959, July.
    6. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    7. Paulo Albuquerque & Bart J. Bronnenberg, 2009. "Estimating Demand Heterogeneity Using Aggregated Data: An Application to the Frozen Pizza Category," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 356-372, 03-04.
    8. Yuichi Kitamura & Michael Stutzer, 1997. "An Information-Theoretic Alternative to Generalized Method of Moments Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 861-874, July.
    9. Aviv Nevo, 2000. "A Practitioner's Guide to Estimation of Random-Coefficients Logit Models of Demand," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 513-548, December.
    10. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    11. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, Fall.
    12. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
    13. Tsagkanos, Athanasios G., 2007. "A bootstrap-based minimum bias maximum simulated likelihood estimator of Mixed Logit," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 282-286, August.
    14. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Competitive Pricing Behavior in the US Auto Market: A Structural Analysis," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm228, Yale School of Management.
    15. Pradeep Chintagunta & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Khim Yong Goh, 2005. "Beyond the Endogeneity Bias: The Effect of Unmeasured Brand Characteristics on Household-Level Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 832-849, May.
    16. Katherine Ho, 2006. "The welfare effects of restricted hospital choice in the US medical care market," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(7), pages 1039-1079.
    17. Marina Giacomo, 2008. "GMM estimation of a structural demand model for yogurt and the effects of the introduction of new brands," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 537-565, June.
    18. Andrés Musalem & Eric T. Bradlow & Jagmohan S. Raju, 2009. "Bayesian estimation of random‐coefficients choice models using aggregate data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 490-516, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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:spr:empeco:v:43:y:2012:i:3:p:1353-1372. 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 (Rebekah McClure). 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.