Abstract
This paper develops a theoretically consistent continuous demand system model that incorporates latent, probabilistic consideration sets. In contrast to existing discrete choice consideration models, the proposed model is econometrically tractable with consumption data for many goods. The model’s empirical properties are illustrated with an 89-site recreation data set from the 1994 National Survey of Recreation and the Environment (NSRE). Parameter and welfare estimates suggest that the latent consideration set models fit the data better and may imply a bias-variance tradeoff relative to traditional models.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andrews DW (2001) Testing when a parameter is on the boundary of a maintained hypothesis. Econometrica 69: 683–734
Ben-Akiva M, Boccora B (1995) Discrete choice models and latent consideration sets. Int J Res Mark 12: 9–24
Chiang J, Chib S, Narasimhan C (1999) Markov chain Monte Carlo and model of consideration set and parameter heterogeneity. J Econom 89: 223–248
Deaton A, Irish M (1984) Statistical models for zero expenditures in household budgets. J Public Econ 23: 59–80
Englin J, Boxall P, Watson D (1998) Modeling recreation demand in a Poisson system of equations. Am J Agric Econ 80: 255–263
Fisher FM, Shell K (1968) Taste and quality change in the pure theory of the true cost-of-living index. In: Wolfe JN (ed) Value, capital and growth. Aldine, Chicago
Gouriéroux C, Monfort A (1996) Simulation-based econometric methods. New York, Oxford
Gurmu S, Trivedi P (1996) Excess zeros in count models for recreation trips. J Bus Econ Stat 14(4): 469–477
Greene W (1994) Accounting for excess zeros and sample selection in poisson and negative binomial regression models. Stern School of Business, New York University, New York
Haab T, Hicks R (1997) Accounting for choice set endogeneity in random utility models of recreation demand. J Environ Econ Manage 34(2): 127–147
Haab T, McConnell K (1996) Count data models and the problem of zeros in recreation demand analysis. Am J Agric Econ 78: 89–102
Horowitz J (1991) Modeling the choice of choice sets in discrete-choice random utility models. Environ Plan 23: 1237–1246
Lee LF, Pitt M (1986) Microeconomic demand systems with binding non-negativity constraints: the dual approach. Econometrica 54: 1237–1242
Mäler KG (1974) Environmental economics: a theoretical inquiry. Johns Hopkins, Baltimore
Manski C (1977) The structure of random utility models. Theory Decis 8: 229–254
Neary JP, Roberts KWS (1980) The theory of household behavior under rationing. Eur Econ Rev 13: 25–42
Parsons G, Massey DM, Tomasi T (2000) Familiar and favorite sites in a random utility model of beach recreation. Mar Resour Econ 14: 299–315
Parsons G, Plantinga A, Boyle K (2000) Narrow choice sets in a random utility model of recreation demand. Land Econ 76(1): 86–99
Peters T, Adamowicz W, Boxall P (1995) Influence of choice set considerations in modeling the benefits from improved water quality. Water Resour Res 31(7): 1781–1787
Roberts J, Nedungadi P (1995) Studying consideration in the consumer decision process: progress and challenges. Int J Res Mark 12: 3–7
Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 6: 461–464
Self S, Liang K (1987) Asymptotic properties of maximum likelihood estimators and likelihood ratio tests under non-standard conditions. J Am Stat Assoc 82(398): 605–610
Sethuraman R, Cole C, Jain D (1994) Analyzing the effect of information format and task on cutoff search strategies. J Consum Psychol 3(2): 103–136
Shonkwiler JS, Shaw WD (1996) Hurdle count-data models in recreation demand analysis. J Agric Resour Econ 21(2): 210–219
Shocker A, Ben-Akiva M, Boccara B, Nedungadi P (1991) Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice. Mark Lett 2(3): 181–197
Swait J (1984) Incorporating constraints in discrete choice models of transportation demand. Dissertation, MIT
Swait J, Ben-Akiva M (1987a) Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation. Transport Res B 21(2): 91–102
Swait J, Ben-Akiva M (1987b) Empirical test of a constrained choice discrete choice model: mode choice in Sao Paulo Brazil. Transport Res B 21(2): 103–115
Train K (2003) Discrete choice analysis with simulation. Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
von Haefen R (2003) Incorporating observed choice into the construction of welfare measures from random utility models. J Environ Econ Manage 45(2): 145–165
von Haefen R, Phaneuf D, Parsons G (2004) Estimation and welfare analysis with large demand systems. J Bus Econ Stat 22 22(2): 194–205
Vuong QH (1989) Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica 57: 307–333
Wales T, Woodland A (1983) Estimation of consumer demand systems with binding non-negativity constraints. J Econom 21: 263–285
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
von Haefen, R.H. Latent Consideration Sets and Continuous Demand Systems. Environ Resource Econ 41, 363–379 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-008-9196-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-008-9196-x