Like It or Not, You Are Using One Value Representation

被引:8
作者
Hawkins, Guy E. [1 ]
Islam, Towhidul [2 ]
Marley, A. A. J. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Newcastle, Sch Psychol, Univ Dr, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
[2] Univ Guelph, Coll Business & Econ, Dept Mkt & Consumer Studies, Guelph, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Victoria, Dept Psychol, Victoria, BC, Canada
[4] Univ South Australia, Inst Choice, Business Sch, Adelaide, SA, Australia
来源
DECISION-WASHINGTON | 2019年 / 6卷 / 03期
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
best-worst scaling; choice; model; latent mixture; Bayesian model selection;
D O I
10.1037/dec0000100
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Do we use the same information to decide what we like and what we do not like? Best-worst scaling-where respondents select their most and their least preferred option from a set of options-is an efficient method for obtaining information of direct relevance to this question. Many best-worst scaling applications use multinomial logit (MNL) models to predict such best and worst choice data, explicitly or implicitly assuming that best and worst choices are driven by the same parameters for utility information. Some recent literature, however, has criticized this common practice as an overly simplistic representation of the choice process. We tested this assumption by applying three MNL-type models of increasing complexity in their parameterization to the stated best-worst choices from a total of 1,200 individuals drawn from five data sets. Our Bayesian latent mixture modeling found clear evidence that the same utility parameters drive individuals' best and worst choices, although usually with an additional scale parameter leading to more variable worst choices. These conclusions also held for stated best-worst choices of the same individuals for the same alternatives after a 6-, 12-, and 18-month delay. We argue that the conclusion of several recent papers that best and worst choices are driven by different utility information or reflect different decision processes is based on inadequate data and/or data analyses.
引用
收藏
页码:237 / 260
页数:24
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]   Repeated questioning in choice experiments: are we improving statistical efficiency or getting respondents confused? [J].
Alberini, Anna .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 2012, 1 (02) :216-233
[2]   Bayesian statistical approaches to evaluating cognitive models [J].
Annis, Jeffrey ;
Palmeri, Thomas J. .
WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2018, 9 (02)
[3]   Rigorously Testing Multialternative Decision Field Theory Against Random Utility Models [J].
Berkowitsch, Nicolas A. J. ;
Scheibehenne, Benjamin ;
Rieskamp, Joerg .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2014, 143 (03) :1331-1348
[4]   General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations [J].
Brooks, SP ;
Gelman, A .
JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL AND GRAPHICAL STATISTICS, 1998, 7 (04) :434-455
[5]   Workshop synthesis: Stated preference surveys and experimental design, an audit of the journey so far and future research perspectives [J].
Cherchi, Elisabetta ;
Hensher, David A. .
TRANSPORT SURVEY METHODS: EMBRACING BEHAVIOURAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES, 2015, 11 :154-164
[6]   Multi-attribute, multi-alternative models of choice,: Choice, reaction time, and process tracing [J].
Cohen, Andrew L. ;
Kang, Namyi ;
Leise, Tanya L. .
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 98 :45-72
[7]   Individual level models vs. sample level models: contrasts and mutual benefits [J].
Dumont, Jeffrey ;
Giergiczny, Marek ;
Hess, Stephane .
TRANSPORTMETRICA A-TRANSPORT SCIENCE, 2015, 11 (06) :465-483
[8]   Models of Sequential Evaluation in Best-Worst Choice Tasks [J].
Dyachenko, Tatiana ;
Reczek, Rebecca Walker ;
Allenby, Greg M. .
MARKETING SCIENCE, 2014, 33 (06) :828-848
[9]  
Flynn T. N., 2014, HDB CHOICE MODELLING, P178, DOI DOI 10.1017/CB09781107337855.010
[10]  
Giergiczny M, 2017, EUR J TRANSP INFRAST, V17, P457