IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1907.04853.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Discrete Choice and Welfare Analysis with Unobserved Choice Sets

Author

Listed:
  • Victor H. Aguiar
  • Nail Kashaev

Abstract

We propose a framework for doing sharp nonparametric welfare analysis in discrete choice models with unobserved variation in choice sets. We recover jointly the distribution of choice sets and the distribution of preferences. To achieve this we use panel data on choices and assume nestedness of the latent choice sets. Nestedness means that choice sets of different decision makers are ordered by inclusion. It is satisfied, for instance, when the choice set variation is the result of either a search process or unobserved feasibility. Using variation of the uncovered choice sets we show how to do ordinal (nonparametric) welfare comparisons. When one is willing to make additional assumptions about preferences, we show how to nonparametrically identify the ranking over average utilities in the standard multinomial choice setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor H. Aguiar & Nail Kashaev, 2019. "Discrete Choice and Welfare Analysis with Unobserved Choice Sets," Papers 1907.04853, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2019.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1907.04853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.04853
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aguiar, Victor H., 2017. "Random categorization and bounded rationality," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 46-52.
    2. repec:eee:econom:v:200:y:2017:i:2:p:326-343 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(6), pages 1883-1909, November.
    4. Valentino Dardanoni & Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti & Christopher J. Tyson, 2017. "Inferring Cognitive Heterogeneity from Aggregate Choices," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 201701, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews, revised 25 May 2017.
    5. Jacob Goeree & Charles Holt & Thomas Palfrey, 2005. "Regular Quantal Response Equilibrium," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 347-367, December.
    6. Matthew Polisson & John K.-H. Quah, 2013. "Revealed Preference in a Discrete Consumption Space," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 28-34, February.
    7. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2014. "Stochastic Choice and Consideration Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(3), pages 1153-1176, May.
    8. Hu, Yingyao & McAdams, David & Shum, Matthew, 2013. "Identification of first-price auctions with non-separable unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 174(2), pages 186-193.
    9. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, December.
    10. Jeremy T. Fox, 2007. "Semiparametric estimation of multinomial discrete-choice models using a subset of choices," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 1002-1019, December.
    11. Eric Gautier & Yuichi Kitamura, 2013. "Nonparametric Estimation in Random Coefficients Binary Choice Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(2), pages 581-607, March.
    12. Drew Fudenberg & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2015. "Stochastic Choice and Revealed Perturbed Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2371-2409, November.
    13. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Matthew Thirkettle, 2019. "Discrete Choice under Risk with Limited Consideration," Papers 1902.06629, arXiv.org.
    14. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2006. "Random Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 121-146, January.
    15. Ichimura, Hidehiko & Thompson, T. Scott, 1998. "Maximum likelihood estimation of a binary choice model with random coefficients of unknown distribution," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 269-295, June.
    16. Jason Abaluck & Abi Adams, 2017. "What do consumers consider before they choose? Identification from asymmetric demand responses," IFS Working Papers W17/09, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    17. Manski, Charles F., 1975. "Maximum score estimation of the stochastic utility model of choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 205-228, August.
    18. 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.
    19. Jason Abaluck & Abi Adams, 2017. "What Do Consumers Consider Before They Choose? Identification from Asymmetric Demand Responses," NBER Working Papers 23566, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Yao Luo, 2018. "Unobserved Heterogeneity in Auctions under Restricted Stochastic Dominance," Working Papers tecipa-606, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    21. Hu, Yingyao, 2008. "Identification and estimation of nonlinear models with misclassification error using instrumental variables: A general solution," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 27-61, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:1907.04853. 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: (arXiv administrators). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.