Monitoring Choice Task Attribute Attendance in Nonmarket Valuation of Multiple Park Management Services: Does It Matter?

Scarpa, Riccardo; Thiene, Mara; Hensher, David A.

doi:10.3368/le.86.4.817

Cited by 100 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Puckett and Hensher, 2008;Rose et al, 2011;Scarpa et al, 2010;Carlsson et al, 2010) towards a focus on inferring the actual processing strategies from data on observed or experimental behaviour (e.g Scarpa et al, 2009;Hess and Hensher, 2010). A key role in this context was played by the early discussions in Hess and Rose (2007), who proposed the use of a latent class approach to accommodate attribute nonattendance, a method since adopted by numerous other studies (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s not that I don’t care, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ReuseUnless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version -refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher's website. TakedownIf you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request.It's not that I don't care, I just don't care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneityStephane Hess * Amanda StathopoulosAbstract With the growing interest in the topic of attribute non-attendance, there is now widespread use of latent class (LC) structures aimed at capturing such behaviour, across a number of different fields. Specifically, these studies rely on a confirmatory LC model, using two separate values for each coefficient, one of which is fixed to zero while the other is estimated, and then use the obtained class probabilities as an indication of the degree of attribute non-attendance. In the present paper, we argue that this approach is in fact misguided, and that the results are likely to be affected by confounding with regular taste heterogeneity. We contrast the confirmatory model with an exploratory LC structure in which the values in both classes are estimated. We also put forward a combined latent class mixed logit model (LC-MMNL) which allows jointly for attribute non-attendance and for continuous taste heterogeneity. Across three separate case studies, the exploratory LC model clearly rejects the confirmatory LC approach and suggests that rates of non-attendance may be much lower than what is suggested by the standard model, or even zero. The combined LC-MMNL model similarly produces significant improvements in model fit, along with substantial reductions in the implied rate of attribute non-attendance, in some cases even eliminating the phenomena across the sample population. Our results thus call for a reappraisal of the large body of recent work that has implied high rates of attribute non-attendance for some attributes. Finally, we also highlight a number of general issues with attribute non-attendance, in particular relating to the computation of willingness to pay measures.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s not that I don’t care, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The overall conclusion from the research is that accounting for decision process heterogeneity in latent classes -that is, allowing heuristic use to vary by subgroups of respondents (up to a probability) -leads to improvements in model fits compared to the standard multinomial logit model, and where assessed, the mixed logit model based on a standard utility specification. In instances where supplementary questions are a part of the survey instrument, directly embedding self-stated responses to questions of whether certain attributes are ignored has further improved the explanatory power of the models and the efficiency of marginal WTP estimates (see for example, Scarpa et al, 2010).…”

Section: Other Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embedding Decision Heuristics in Discrete Choice Models: A Review

Leong

Hensher

2012

Transport Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrary to the usual assumption of fixed, well-defined preferences, it is increasingly evident that individuals are likely to approach a choice task using rules and decision heuristics that are dependent on the choice environment. More specifically, heuristics that are defined by the local choice context, such as the gains or losses of an attribute value relative to the other attributes, seem to be consistently employed. Recent empirical findings also demonstrate that previous choices and previously encountered choice tasks shown to respondents can affect the current choice outcome, indicating a form of inter-dependence across choice sets. This paper is primarily focused on reviewing how heuristics have been modelled in stated choice data. The paper begins with a review of the heuristics that may be relevant for coping with choice task complexity and then proceeds to discuss some modelling approaches. Next, relational heuristics, such as prospect theory, random regret minimisation and extremeness aversion (compromise effect) are discussed.These are heuristics which operate within the local choice set. Another major class of heuristics reviewed in this paper pertains to ordering effects and more generally, on past outcomes and past attribute levels of the alternatives.

show abstract

“…To illuminate this, some researchers have been using debriefing questions after the choice experiments, asking respondents about the way choices were made (Campbell et al, 2008). Alternatively, other researchers use modelling tools to account for attribute nonattendance (see Hensher, 2009;Scarpa et al, 2010;Hess and Hensher, 2010). The problem that we have at hand is just the opposite: we hypothesize that some respondents do not ignore some of the choice attributes, but rather implicitly include additional attributes when making trade-offs.…”

Section: Literature Overview and Focus Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Scale, Scope and Cognition: Context Analysis of Multiple Stated Choice Experiments on the Values of Life and Limb

Bočkarjova¹,

Rietveld

Verhoef

2012

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring Choice Task Attribute Attendance in Nonmarket Valuation of Multiple Park Management Services: Does It Matter?

Cited by 100 publications

References 20 publications

It’s not that I don’t care, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity

It’s not that I don’t care, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity

Embedding Decision Heuristics in Discrete Choice Models: A Review

Scale, Scope and Cognition: Context Analysis of Multiple Stated Choice Experiments on the Values of Life and Limb

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About