IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/32626.html

Capturing Preferences Under Incomplete Scenarios Using Elicited Choice Probabilities

Author

Listed:
  • Herriges, Joseph A.
  • Bhattacharjee, Subhra
  • Kling, Catherine L.

Abstract

Manski (1999) proposed an approach for dealing with a particular form respondent uncertainty in discrete choice settings, particularly relevant in survey based research when the uncertainty stems from the incomplete description of the choice scenarios. Specifically, he suggests eliciting choice probabilities from respondents rather than their single choice of an alternative. A recent paper in IER by Blass et al. (2010) further develops the approach and presents the first empirical application. This paper extends the literature in a number of directions, examining the linkage between elicited choice probabilities and the more common discrete choice elicitation format. We also provide the first convergent validity test of the elicited choice probability format vis-\`a-vis the standard discrete choice format in a split sample experiment. Finally, we discuss the differences between welfare measures that can be derived from elicited choice probabilities versus those that can obtained from discrete choice responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Herriges, Joseph A. & Bhattacharjee, Subhra & Kling, Catherine L., 2011. "Capturing Preferences Under Incomplete Scenarios Using Elicited Choice Probabilities," Staff General Research Papers Archive 32626, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:32626
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/papers/p12626-2011-03-24.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Palma, Andre & Myers, Gordon M & Papageorgiou, Yorgos Y, 1994. "Rational Choice under an Imperfect Ability to Choose," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 419-440, June.
    2. Andre Palma & Moshe Ben-Akiva & David Brownstone & Charles Holt & Thierry Magnac & Daniel McFadden & Peter Moffatt & Nathalie Picard & Kenneth Train & Peter Wakker & Joan Walker, 2008. "Risk, uncertainty and discrete choice models," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 269-285, December.
      • André de Palma & Moshe Ben-Akiva & David Brownstone & Charles Holt & Thierry Magnac & Daniel McFadden & Peter Moffatt & Nathalie Picard & Kenneth Train & Peter Wakker & Joan Walker, 2008. "Risk, Uncertainty and Discrete Choice Models," Thema Working Papers 2008-02, THEMA (Théorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), CY Cergy-Paris University, ESSEC and CNRS.
    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. Pedersen, Line Bjørnskov & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2020. "Handling resolvable uncertainty from incomplete scenarios in future doctors' job choice – Probabilities vs discrete choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    2. Kim, Hyeon-Woong & Sung, Jae-hoon, 2024. "An Analysis of Preference for the Rural Residential environment and Landscape Improvements," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343815, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Riccardo Scarpa & Claudia Bazzani & Diego Begalli & Roberta Capitello, 2021. "Resolvable and Near‐epistemic Uncertainty in Stated Preference for Olive Oil: An Empirical Exploration," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 335-369, June.
    4. Kettlewell, Nathan & Walker, Matthew J. & Yoo, Hong Il, 2024. "Alternative Models of Preference Heterogeneity for Elicited Choice Probabilities," IZA Discussion Papers 16821, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. repec:ags:aaea22:343815 is not listed on IDEAS

    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. Christian Schlereth & Christine Eckert & Bernd Skiera, 2012. "Using discrete choice experiments to estimate willingness-to-pay intervals," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 761-776, September.
    2. Richards, Daniel R. & Warren, Philip H. & Maltby, Lorraine & Moggridge, Helen L., 2017. "Awareness of greater numbers of ecosystem services affects preferences for floodplain management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 138-146.
    3. Foster, Gigi & Frijters, Paul & Schaffner, Markus & Torgler, Benno, 2018. "Expectation formation in an evolving game of uncertainty: New experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 379-405.
    4. André de Palma & Gordon M. Myers & Yorgos Y. Papageorgiou, 2023. "Imperfect public choice," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(4), pages 1413-1429, November.
    5. Emmanuel Kemel & Muriel Travers, 2016. "Comparing attitudes toward time and toward money in experience-based decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(1), pages 71-100, January.
    6. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    7. André de Palma & Gordon M. Myers & Yorgos Y. Papageorgiou, 2022. "PoolLines: Imperfect Public Choice," Thema Working Papers 2022-25, THEMA (Théorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), CY Cergy-Paris University, ESSEC and CNRS.
    8. Swait, Joffre & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2001. "Choice Environment, Market Complexity, and Consumer Behavior: A Theoretical and Empirical Approach for Incorporating Decision Complexity into Models of Consumer Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 141-167, November.
    9. Xiao, Yu & Fukuda, Daisuke, 2015. "On the cost of misperceived travel time variability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 96-112.
    10. Moser, Riccarda & Raffaelli, Roberta, "undated". "Exploiting cut-off information to incorporate context effect: a discrete choice experiment on small fruits in a Alpine region," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114646, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Ruben Chumpitaz & Kristiaan Kerstens & Nicholas Paparoidamis & Matthias Staat, 2010. "Hedonic price function estimation in economics and marketing: revisiting Lancaster’s issue of “noncombinable” goods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 145-161, January.
    12. Agee, Mark D. & Crocker, Thomas D., 2002. "On Techniques to Value the Impact of Environmental Hazards on Children's Health," National Center for Environmental Economics-NCEE Working Papers 280801, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    13. Kerstens, Kristiaan & Mounir, Amine & de Woestyne, Ignace Van, 2011. "Non-parametric frontier estimates of mutual fund performance using C- and L-moments: Some specification tests," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 1190-1201, May.
    14. Dimitrije Marković & Jan Gläscher & Peter Bossaerts & John O’Doherty & Stefan J Kiebel, 2015. "Modeling the Evolution of Beliefs Using an Attentional Focus Mechanism," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-34, October.
    15. Jordan Louviere & Kenneth Train & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Chandra Bhat & David Brownstone & Trudy Cameron & Richard Carson & J. Deshazo & Denzil Fiebig & William Greene & David Hensher & Donald Waldman, 2005. "Recent Progress on Endogeneity in Choice Modeling," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 255-265, December.
    16. John Conlisk, 2001. "Costly Predation and the Distribution of Competence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 475-484, June.
    17. André de Palma & Gordon M. Myers & Yorgos Y. Papageorgiou, 2020. "Models of Imperfect Public Choice," Department of Economics Working Papers 2020-18, McMaster University.
    18. Papola, Andrea & Tinessa, Fiore & Marzano, Vittorio, 2018. "Application of the Combination of Random Utility Models (CoRUM) to route choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 304-326.
    19. Angela Robinson & Anne Spencer & Peter Moffatt, 2015. "A Framework for Estimating Health State Utility Values within a Discrete Choice Experiment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(3), pages 341-350, April.
    20. Vishva Danthurebandara & Jie Yu & Martina Vandebroek, 2015. "Designing choice experiments by optimizing the complexity level to individual abilities," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:isu:genres:32626. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.html .

    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.