IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

A General Treatment of Non-Response Data From Choice Experiments Using Logit Models

Author Info

Listed author(s):
  • Kelvin Balcombe
  • Iain Fraser

    ()

Abstract

A new approach is developed for the treatment of 'Don't Know' (DK) responses, within Choice Experiments. A DK option is motivated by the need to allow respondents the opportunity to express uncertainty. Our model explains a DK using an entropy measure of the similarity between options given to respondents within the Choice Experiment. We illustrate our model by applying it to a Choice Experiment examining consumer preferences for nutrient contents in food. We find that similarity between options in a given choice set does explain the tendency for respondents to report DK.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: ftp://ftp.ukc.ac.uk/pub/ejr/RePEc/ukc/ukcedp/0916.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by School of Economics, University of Kent in its series Studies in Economics with number 0916.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Oct 2009
Handle: RePEc:ukc:ukcedp:0916
Contact details of provider: Postal:
School of Economics, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NP

Phone: +44 (0)1227 827497
Web page: http://www.kent.ac.uk/economics/

Order Information: Email:


Keywords: Choice Experiment; Respondent Uncertainty; Bayesian Methods;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

  • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
  • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
  • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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.:

as
in new window


  1. Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John M., 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), September.
  2. Train, K. & Weeks, M., 2004. "Discrete Choice Models in Preference Space and Willingness-to Pay Space," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0443, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  3. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
  4. Eli P. Fenichel & Frank Lupi & John P. Hoehn & Michael D. Kaplowitz, 2009. "Split-Sample Tests of "No Opinion" Responses in an Attribute-Based Choice Model," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(2), pages 348-362.
  5. Scarpa, R. & Thiene, M. & Train, K., 2008. "Appendix to Utility in WTP space: a tool to address confounding random scale effects in destination choice to the Alps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics Appendices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), November.
  6. Golan, Amos & Judge, George G. & Miller, Douglas, 1996. "Maximum Entropy Econometrics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1488, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  7. Welsh, Michael P. & Poe, Gregory L., 1998. "Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 170-185, September.
  8. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
  9. Maria L. Loureiro & Azucena Gracia & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2006. "Do consumers value nutritional labels?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 249-268, June.
  10. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2007. "Effects of Label Information on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Food Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(3), pages 795-809.
  11. Mary F. Evans & Nicholas E. Flores & Kevin J. Boyle, 2003. "Multiple-Bounded Uncertainty Choice Data as Probabilistic Intentions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 549-560.
  12. Berning Joshua P & Chouinard Hayley H & McCluskey Jill J, 2008. "Consumer Preferences for Detailed versus Summary Formats of Nutrition Information on Grocery Store Shelf Labels," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, August.
  13. Balcombe, Kelvin & Chalak, Ali & Fraser, Iain, 2009. "Model selection for the mixed logit with Bayesian estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 226-237, March.
  14. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Kenneth Train, 2008. "Utility in Willingness to Pay Space: A Tool to Address Confounding Random Scale Effects in Destination Choice to the Alps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 994-1010.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

The CitEc project has not yet found citations to this item.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ukc:ukcedp:0916. 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: (Tracey Girling)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.