The perceived unreliability of rank-ordered data: an econometric origin and implications
The problem of unstable coecients in the rank-ordered logit model has been traditionally interpreted as a sign that survey respondents fail to provide reliable ranking responses. This paper shows that the problem may embody the inherent sensitivity of the model to stochastic misspecification instead. Even a minor departure from the postulated random utility function can induce the problem, for instance when rank-ordered logit is estimated whereas the true additive disturbance is iid normal over alternatives. Related implications for substantive analyses and further modelling are explored. In general, a well-speci ed random coecient rank-ordered logit model can mitigate, though not eliminate, the problem and produce analytically useful results. The model can also be generalised to be more suitable for forecasting purposes, by accommodating that stochastic misspecification matters less for individuals with more deterministic preferences. An empirical analysis using an Australian nursing job preferences survey shows that the estimates behave in accordance with these implications.
|Date of creation:||Nov 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Australian School of Business Building, Sydney 2052|
Fax: +61)-2- 9313- 6337
Web page: http://www.economics.unsw.edu.au/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, june. pag.
- Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
- Yoo, Hong Il & Doiron, Denise, 2013.
"The use of alternative preference elicitation methods in complex discrete choice experiments,"
Journal of Health Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1166-1179.
- Hong il Yoo & Denise Doiron, 2012. "The use of alternative preference elicitation methods in complex discrete choice experiments," Discussion Papers 2012-16, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
- 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.
- Michael Keane & Nada Wasi, 2013. "Comparing Alternative Models Of Heterogeneity In Consumer Choice Behavior," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1018-1045, 09.
- John Calfee & Clifford Winston & Randolph Stempski, 2001. "Econometric Issues In Estimating Consumer Preferences From Stated Preference Data: A Case Study Of The Value Of Automobile Travel Time," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(4), pages 699-707, November.
- Huber, Joel & Train, Kenneth, 2000.
"On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt7zm4f51b, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Joel Huber & Kenneth Train, 2001. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Econometrics 0012003, EconWPA.
- Joel Huber and Kenneth Train., 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Economics Working Papers E00-289, University of California at Berkeley.
- Kenneth E. Train & Clifford Winston, 2007. "Vehicle Choice Behavior And The Declining Market Share Of U.S. Automakers," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1469-1496, November.
- Riccardo Scarpa & Sandra Notaro & Jordan Louviere & Roberta Raffaelli, 2010. "Exploring Scale Effects of Best/Worst Rank Ordered Choice Data to Estimate Benefits of Tourism in Alpine Grazing Commons," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(3), pages 809-824.
- Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
- Ben-Akiva, Moshe & Morikawa, Takayuki & Shiroishi, Fumiaki, 1992. "Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 149-164, March.
- Layton, David F., 2000. "Random Coefficient Models for Stated Preference Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 21-36, July.
- J. S. Cramer, 2007. "Robustness of Logit Analysis: Unobserved Heterogeneity and Mis-specified Disturbances," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 69(4), pages 545-555, 08.
- Alejandro Caparrós & José L. Oviedo & Pablo Campos, 2008. "Would You Choose Your Preferred Option? Comparing Choice and Recoded Ranking Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(3), pages 843-855.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:swe:wpaper:2012-46. 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: (Gabriele Gratton)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.