IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v43y2009i3p365-377.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The constrained multinomial logit: A semi-compensatory choice model

Author

Listed:
  • Martínez, Francisco
  • Aguila, Felipe
  • Hurtubia, Ricardo

Abstract

The traditional formulation of logit models applied to transport demand assumes a compensatory (indirect) utility function in which the consumers' strategy assumes a trade-off between attributes. Several authors have criticized this approach because it fails to recognize attribute thresholds in consumer behavior, or a more generic domain where such a compensatory strategy is contained. In this paper, a mixed strategy is proposed, which combines the compensatory strategy valid in the interior of the choice domain with cutoff factors that restrain choices to the domain edge. The proposed model combines the multinomial logit model with a binomial logit factor that represents soft cutoffs. This approach extends previous contributions in several ways and allows multiple dimensions for cutoff factors. In addition to considering individual behavior, it introduces system constraints such as capacity and inter-agent interactions (choice externalities). This extension yields a non-linear problem, which is solved by analyzing the fixed point problem. Additionally, a set of evaluation tools, a social utility of the constrained problem, and a measure of the shadow price of each constraint, are proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Martínez, Francisco & Aguila, Felipe & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2009. "The constrained multinomial logit: A semi-compensatory choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 365-377, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:43:y:2009:i:3:p:365-377
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191-2615(08)00072-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francisco Martínez & Ricardo Hurtubia, 2006. "Dynamic Model for the Simulation of Equilibrium Status in the Land Use Market," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 55-73, March.
    2. Swait, Joffre, 2001. "A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 903-928, November.
    3. Cantillo, Víctor & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2005. "A semi-compensatory discrete choice model with explicit attribute thresholds of perception," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 641-657, August.
    4. Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 91-102, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marisol Castro & Francisco Martínez & Marcela Munizaga, 2013. "Estimation of a constrained multinomial logit model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 563-581, May.
    2. Swait, Joffre, 2009. "Choice models based on mixed discrete/continuous PDFs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 766-783, August.
    3. Elgar, Ilan & Farooq, Bilal & Miller, Eric J., 2015. "Simulations of firm location decisions: Replicating office location choices in the Greater Toronto Area," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 39-51.
    4. Capurso, Mauro & Hess, Stephane & Dekker, Thijs, 2019. "Modelling the role of consideration of alternatives in mode choice: An application on the Rome-Milan corridor," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 170-184.
    5. Kaplan, Sigal & Shiftan, Yoram & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2012. "Development and estimation of a semi-compensatory model with a flexible error structure," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 291-304.
    6. Sigal Kaplan & Yoram Shiftan & Shlomo Bekhor, 2011. "A Semi-Compensatory Residential Choice Model With Flexible Error Structure," ERSA conference papers ersa10p65, European Regional Science Association.
    7. José Luis Espinosa-Aranda & Ricardo García-Ródenas & María Luz López-García & Eusebio Angulo, 2018. "Constrained nested logit model: formulation and estimation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1523-1557, September.
    8. Cantillo, Víctor & Amaya, Johanna & Ortúzar, J. de D., 2010. "Thresholds and indifference in stated choice surveys," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 753-763, July.
    9. Zhu, Wei & Timmermans, Harry, 2010. "Modeling simplifying information processing strategies in conjoint experiments," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 764-780, July.
    10. Ton, Danique & Bekhor, Shlomo & Cats, Oded & Duives, Dorine C. & Hoogendoorn-Lanser, Sascha & Hoogendoorn, Serge P., 2020. "The experienced mode choice set and its determinants: Commuting trips in the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 744-758.
    11. Arentze, Theo & Timmermans, Harry, 2007. "Parametric action decision trees: Incorporating continuous attribute variables into rule-based models of discrete choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 772-783, August.
    12. Danny Campbell & Seda Erdem, 2015. "Position Bias in Best-worst Scaling Surveys: A Case Study on Trust in Institutions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(2), pages 526-545.
    13. Cantillo, Víctor & Heydecker, Benjamin & de Dios Ortúzar, Juan, 2006. "A discrete choice model incorporating thresholds for perception in attribute values," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 807-825, November.
    14. Cascetta, Ennio & Papola, Andrea, 2009. "Dominance among alternatives in random utility models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 170-179, February.
    15. Evangelinos, Christos & Tscharaktschiew, Stefan & Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio, 2018. "Pricing workplace parking via cash-out: Effects on modal choice and implications for transport policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 369-380.
    16. Oehlmann, Malte & Glenk, Klaus & Lloyd-Smith, Patrick & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2021. "Quantifying landscape externalities of renewable energy development: Implications of attribute cut-offs in choice experiments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    17. Campbell, Danny & Hensher, David A. & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2014. "Bounding WTP distributions to reflect the ‘actual’ consideration set," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 4-15.
    18. Chorus, Caspar G. & Arentze, Theo A. & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2008. "A Random Regret-Minimization model of travel choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-18, January.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:3:p:260-279 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Joffre Swait & Fred Feinberg, 2014. "Deciding how to decide: an agenda for multi-stage choice modelling research in marketing," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 26, pages 649-660, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. María Feo-Valero & Leandro García-Menéndez & Salvador del Saz-Salazar, 2016. "Rail freight transport and demand requirements: an analysis of attribute cut-offs through a stated preference experiment," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 101-122, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:43:y:2009:i:3:p:365-377. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.