Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
A finite mixture approach toconditional logit models is developed in whichlatent classes are used to promoteunderstanding of systematic heterogeneity. The model is applied to wilderness recreationin which a branded choice experiment involvingchoice of one park from a demand system wasadministered to a sample of recreationists. The basis of membership in the classes orsegments in the sample involved attitudinalmeasures of motivations for taking a trip, aswell as their stated preferences overwilderness park attributes. The econometricanalysis suggested that four classes of peopleexist in the sample. Using the model toexamine welfare measures of some hypotheticalpolicy changes identified markedly differentwelfare effects than the standard singlesegment model, and provided insight into thedifferential impact of alternative policies.
- Adamowicz, W. L., J. J. Louviere and M. Williams (1994), ‘Combining Stated and Revealed Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26, 271–296.
- Adamowicz, W. L., J. D. Swait, P. C. Boxall, J. J. Louviere and M. Williams (1997), ‘Perceptions Versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32, 65–84.
- Adamowicz, W. L., J. Louviere and J. Swait (1998), Introduction to Attribute-based Stated Choice Methods. Final Report to Resource Valuation Branch, Damage Assessment Center, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce. January. 44 pp.
- Allenby, G. (1990), ‘Hypothesis Testing with Scanner Data: The Advantage of Bayesian Methods’, Journal of Marketing Research 27, 379–389.
- Beard, J. G. and M. G. Ragheb (1983), ‘Measuring Leisure Motivation’, Journal of Leisure Research 15, 219–228.
- Ben-Akiva, M. and J. Swait (1986), ‘The Akaike Likelihood Ratio Index’, Transportation Science 20, 133–136.
- Ben-Akiva, M., J. Walker, A. T. Bernardino, D. A. Gopinath, T. Morikawa and A. Polydoropoulou (1997), Integration of Choice and Latent Variable Models. Paper presented at the 1997 IATBR, University of Texas at Austin.
- Boxall, P. C. and W. L. Adamowicz (1999), Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: The Use of Latent Class Analysis. Staff Paper 99–02, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.
- Boxall, P. C. and B. MacNab (2000), ‘Exploring The Preferences of Wildlife Recreationists for Features of Boreal Forest Management: A Choice Experiment Approach’, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30, 1931–1941.
- Boxall, P. C., J. Englin and D. O. Watson (1999), ‘Valuing Backcountry Recreation in Wilderness Parks: A Demand Systems Approach in The Canadian Shield’, Information Report NOR-X-361, Northern Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service, Edmonton, Alberta.
- Bucklin, R. E. and S. Gupta (1992), ‘Brand Choice, Purchase Incidence and Segmentation: An Integrated Modeling Approach’, Journal of Marketing Research 20, 201–215.
- Cameron, T. C. and J. Englin (1997), ‘Respondent Experience and Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33, 296–313.
- Crandall, R. (1980), ‘Motivations for Leisure’, Journal of Leisure Research 12, 45–54.
- Gupta, S. and P. K. Chintagunta (1994), ‘On Using Demographic Variables to Determine Segment Membership in Logit Mixture Models’, Journal of Marketing Research 31, 128–136.
- Hanemann, W. M. (1982), Applied Welfare Analysis With Qualitative Response Models. Working Paper No. 241. University of California, Berkeley, 26 pp.
- Kamakura, W. and G. Russell (1989), ‘A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure’, Journal of Marketing Research 26, 379–390.
- Layton, D. F. (1996), Rank-Ordered, Random Coefficients Multinomial Probit Models for Stated Preference Surveys. Paper Presented at the 1996 Association of Environmental and Resource Economists Workshop, June 2–4, Tahoe City, California.
- Louviere, J. J., D. A. Hensher, and J. D. Swait (2000), Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- McCutcheon, A. L. (1987) Latent Class Analysis. Sage University Papers Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Number 07–064. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
- McFadden, D. (1974), ‘Conditional Logit Analysis Of Qualitative Choice Behavior’, in P. Zarembka, ed., Frontiers in Econometrics. New York, NY: Academic Press, pp. 105–142.
- McFadden, D. (1986), ‘The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research’, Marketing Science 5, 275–297.
- Morey, E. R., R. D. Rowe, and M. Watson (1993), ‘A Repeated Nested-Logit Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75, 578–592.
- Pollack, R. A. and T. J. Wales (1992), Demand System Specification and Estimation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Salomon, I. and M. Ben-Akiva (1983), ‘The Use of the Life-Style Concept in Travel Demand Models’, Environmental and Planning A 15, 623–638.
- Schmidt, P. and R. Strauss (1975), ‘The Predictions of Occupation Using Multinomial Logit Models’, International Economic Review 16, 471–486.
- Shonkwiler, J. S. and W. D. Shaw (1997), Shaken, Not Stirred: A Finite Mixture Approach To Analysing Income Effects in Random Utility Models. Paper Presented at the 1997 Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association. August 2–4, Toronto, Ontario.
- Swait, J. R. (1994), ‘A Structural Equation Model of Latent Segmentation and Product Choice for Cross-Sectional Revealed Preference Choice Data’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 1, 77–89.
- Swait, J. R. and J. J. Louviere (1993), ‘The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models’, Journal of Marketing Research 30, 305–314.
- Titterington, D. M., A. F. M. Smith and U. E. Makov (1985), Statistical Analysis of Finite Mixture Distributions. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
- Train, K. E. (1997), ‘Mixed Logit Models for Recreation Demand’, in C. Kling and J. Herriges, eds., Valuing the Environment Using Recreation Demand Models. Edward Elgave: Lyme New Hampshire.
- Train, K. E. (1998), ‘Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People’, Land Economics 74, 230–239.
- Wind, Y. (1978), ‘Issue and Advances in Segmentation Research’, Journal of Marketing Research 15, 317–337.
- Yatchew, A. and Griliches, Z. (1984), ‘Specification Error in Probit Models’, Review of Economics and Statistics 66, 134–139.
- Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach
Environmental and Resource Economics
Volume 23, Issue 4 , pp 421-446
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- choice experiments
- latent class
- environmental valuation
- preference heterogeneity
- Industry Sectors