Further Evaluating the Impact of Kernel and Bandwidth Specifications of Geographically Weighted Regression on the Equity and Uniformity of Mass Appraisal Models

Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 86)


Research has consistently demonstrated that geographically weighted regression (GWR) models significantly improve upon accuracy of ordinary least squares (OLS)-based computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) models by more accurately accounting for the effects of location (Fotheringham et al. 2002; LeSage 2004; Huang et al. 2010). Bidanset and Lombard (2014a, 2017) previously studied the impacts of various kernel and bandwidth combinations employed in building residual (i.e. sale price less land value) GWR CAMA models and found that the specification of each does bear significant effect on valuation equity attainment. This paper builds upon the previous research by comparing performance of weighting specifications of non-building residual (i.e. full sale price) GWR CAMA models using new data of a different geographic real estate market. We find that the exponential kernel and fixed bandwidth together achieve a superior COD for our data, and that COD does fluctuate depending on the GWR weighting specification.


Geographic weighted regression Automated valuation methods 


  1. Anselin, L., & Griffith, D. A. (1988). Do spatial effects really matter in regression analysis? Papers in Regional Science, 65(1), 11–34.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, M. J. (1973). Recent empirical work on the determinants of relative house prices. Urban Studies, 10(2), 213—233.Google Scholar
  3. Berry, B. J., & Bednarz, R. S. (1975). A hedonic model of prices and assessments for single-family homes: Does the assessor follow the market or the market follow the assessor? Land Economics, 51(1), 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bidanset, P. E., & Lombard, J. R. (2014a). The effect of kernel and bandwidth specification in geographically weighted regression models on the accuracy and uniformity of mass real estate appraisal. Journal of Property Tax Assessment & Administration, 11(3).Google Scholar
  5. Bidanset, P. E., & Lombard, J. R. (2014b). Evaluating spatial model accuracy in mass real estate appraisal: a comparison of geographically weighted regression and the spatial lag model. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 16(3), 169.Google Scholar
  6. Bidanset, P. E., & Lombard, J. R. (2017). Optimal kernel and bandwidth specifications for geographically weighted regression. Applied Spatial Modelling and Planning. J. R. Lombard, E. Stern, G. Clarke (Ed.). Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Borst, R. (2013). Optimal market segmentation and temporal methods. spatio-temporal methods in mass appraisal. Fairfax, VA: International Property Tax Institute. Mason Inn Conference Center.Google Scholar
  8. Borst, R. A., & McCluskey, W. J. (2008). Using geographically weighted regression to detect housing submarkets: Modeling large-scale spatial variations in value. Journal of Property Tax Assessment and Administration, 5(1), 21–51.Google Scholar
  9. Brunsdon, C. (1998). Geographically weighted regression: A natural evolution of the expansion method for spatial data analysis. Environment and planning A, 30, 1905–1927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brunsdon, C., Fotheringham, A. S., & Charlton, M. E. (1996). Geographically weighted regression: A method for exploring spatial nonstationarity. Geographical Analysis, 28(4), 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cho, S. H., Lambert, D. M., & Chen, Z. (2010). Geographically weighted regression bandwidth selection and spatial autocorrelation: An empirical example using Chinese agriculture data. Applied Economics Letters, 17(8), 767–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cleveland, W. S., & Devlin, S. J. (1988). Locally weighted regression: An approach to regression analysis by local fitting. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(403), 596–610.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Fotheringham, A. S., Brunsdon, C., & Charlton, M. (2002). Geographically weighted regression: The analysis of spatially varying relationships. Chichester, West Sussex, England: Wiley.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Gloudemans, R. J. (1999). Mass appraisal of real property. Chicago, IL: International Association of Assessing Officers.Google Scholar
  15. Gloudemans, R., & Almy, R. (2011). Fundamentals of mass appraisal. Kansas City, MO: International Association of Assessing Officers.Google Scholar
  16. Gollini, I., Lu, B., Charlton, M., Brunsdon, C., & Harris, P. (2013). GWmodel: An R package for exploring spatial heterogeneity using geographically weighted models. arXiv preprint: arXiv:1306.0413.
  17. Guo, L., Ma, Z., & Zhang, L. (2008). Comparison of bandwidth selection in application of geographically weighted regression: A case study. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 38(9), 2526–2534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huang, B., Wu, B., & Barry, M. (2010). Geographically and temporally weighted regression for modeling spatio-temporal variation in house prices. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 24(3), 383–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. IAAO (2003). Standard on automated valuation models (AVM’s). Assessment Journal (Fall 2003), 109–154.Google Scholar
  20. International Association of Assessing Officers. (2013). Standard on ratio studies. Chicago, IL: IAAO.Google Scholar
  21. LeSage, J. P. (2004). A family of geographically weighted regression models. In Advances in Spatial Econometrics (pp. 241–264). Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Lockwood, T., & Rossini, P. (2011). Efficacy in modelling location within the mass appraisal process. Pacific Rim Property Research Journal, 17(3), 418–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lu, B., Harris, P., Charlton, M., & Brunsdon, C. (2014). The GWmodel R package: Further topics for exploring spatial heterogeneity using geographically weighted models. Geo-spatial Information Science, 17(2), 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McCluskey, W. J., McCord, M., Davis, P. T., Haran, M., & McIlhatton, D. (2013). Prediction accuracy in mass appraisal: A comparison of modern approaches. Journal of Property Research, 30(4), 239–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McMillen, D. P. (1996). One hundred fifty years of land values in Chicago: A nonparametric approach. Journal of Urban Economics, 40(1), 100–124.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. McMillen, D. P., & Redfearn, C. L. (2010). Estimation and hypothesis testing for nonparametric hedonic house price functions. Journal of Regional Science, 50(3), 712–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moore, J. W. (2009). A History of appraisal theory and practice looking back from IAAO’s 75th year. Journal of Property Tax Assessment & Administration, 6(3), 23.Google Scholar
  28. Moore, J. W., & Myers, J. (2010). Using geographic-attribute weighted regression for CAMA modeling. Journal of Property Tax Assessment & Administration, 7(3), 5–28.Google Scholar
  29. Sugiura, N. (1978). Further analysts of the data by Akaike’s information criterion and the finite corrections. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 7(1), 13–26.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of the Built EnvironmentUlster UniversityNewtownabbeyUK
  2. 2.Old Dominion UniversityNorfolkUSA
  3. 3.African Tax InstituteUniversity of PretoriaPretoriaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations