An argument for preferring Firth bias-adjusted estimates in aggregate and individual-level discrete choice modeling
Using maximum likelihood estimation for discrete choice modeling of small datasets causes two problems. The first problem is that the data often exhibit separation, in which case the maximum likelihood estimates do not exist. Also, provided they exist, the maximum likelihood estimates are biased. In this paper, we show how to adapt Firth's bias-adjustment method for use in discrete choice modeling. This approach removes the first-order bias of the estimates, and it also deals with the separation issue. An additional advantage of the bias adjustment is that it is usually accompanied by a reduction in the variance. Using a large-scale simulation study, we identify the situations where Firth's bias-adjustment method is most useful in avoiding the problem of separation as well as removing the bias and reducing the variance. As a special case, we apply the bias-adjustment approach to discrete choice data from individuals, making it possible to construct an empirical distribution of the respondents' preferences without imposing any a priori population distribution. For both research purposes, we base our findings on data from a stated choice study on various forms of employee compensation.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Prinsstraat 13, B-2000 Antwerpen|
Web page: https://www.uantwerp.be/en/faculties/applied-economic-sciences/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Kessels, Roselinde & Jones, Bradley & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2009. "An Efficient Algorithm for Constructing Bayesian Optimal Choice Designs," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 27(2), pages 279-291.
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, October.
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, October.
- Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2, June.
- Kessels, Roselinde & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2008. "Optimal designs for conjoint experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 2369-2387, January.
- Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
- 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.
- Theodoros Evgeniou & Massimiliano Pontil & Olivier Toubia, 2007. "A Convex Optimization Approach to Modeling Consumer Heterogeneity in Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 805-818, 11-12. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ant:wpaper:2013013. 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: (Joeri Nys)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.