IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lsu/lsuwpp/2014-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Shrinkage Estimation in the Random Parameters Logit Model

Author

Abstract

We explore the properties of a Stein-like shrinkage estimator that combines the fully correlated and uncorrelated Random Parameters Logit model(RPLM). Monte Carlo experiments show that shrinkage and pretest estimators can improve upon the fully correlated RPLM estimator.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Carter Hill & Tong Zeng, 2014. "Shrinkage Estimation in the Random Parameters Logit Model," Departmental Working Papers 2014-11, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    • Handle: RePEc:lsu:lsuwpp:2014-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.lsu.edu/business/economics/files/workingpapers/pap14_11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    2. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    3. Kim, Minbo & CarterHill, R., 1995. "Shrinkage estimation in nonlinear regression The Box-Cox transformation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1-2), pages 1-33.
    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. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    2. Makoto Chikaraishi & Akimasa Fujiwara & Junyi Zhang & Kay Axhausen, 2011. "Identifying variations and co-variations in discrete choice models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(6), pages 993-1016, November.
    3. Partha Deb & Chenghui Li & Pravin K. Trivedi & David M. Zimmer, 2006. "The effect of managed care on use of health care services: results from two contemporaneous household surveys," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 743-760, July.
    4. Martey, E., 2018. "Heterogeneous Demand for Quality Soybean in Northern Ghana," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277013, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. van der Kroon, Bianca & Brouwer, Roy & van Beukering, Pieter J.H., 2014. "The impact of the household decision environment on fuel choice behavior," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 236-247.
    6. Atella, Vincenzo & Deb, Partha, 2008. "Are primary care physicians, public and private sector specialists substitutes or complements? Evidence from a simultaneous equations model for count data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 770-785, May.
    7. Peter Haan, 2005. "State Dependence and Female Labor Supply in Germany: The Extensive and the Intensive Margin," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 538, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    8. Staus, Alexander, 2008. "Standard and Shuffled Halton Sequences in a Mixed Logit Model," Working Papers 93856, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    9. Falco, Paolo & Maloney, William F. & Rijkers, Bob & Sarrias, Mauricio, 2015. "Heterogeneity in subjective wellbeing: An application to occupational allocation in Africa," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 137-153.
    10. Reema Bera & Bhargab Maitra, 2021. "Analyzing Prospective Owners’ Choice Decision towards Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles in Urban India: A Stated Preference Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-24, July.
    11. J Blasch & B van der Kroon & P van Beukering & R Munster & S Fabiani & P Nino & S Vanino, 2022. "Farmer preferences for adopting precision farming technologies: a case study from Italy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(1), pages 33-81.
    12. Grigolon, Anna B. & Borgers, Aloys W.J. & Kemperman, Astrid D.A.M. & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2014. "Vacation length choice: A dynamic mixed multinomial logit model," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 158-167.
    13. Andreas Falke & Harald Hruschka, 2017. "Setting prices in mixed logit model designs," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 139-154, March.
    14. Xiaodong Gong & Robert Breunig, 2017. "Childcare Assistance: Are Subsidies or Tax Credits Better?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 38, pages 7-48, March.
    15. Ida, Takanori, 2010. "Anomaly, impulsivity, and addiction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 194-203, April.
    16. Shengnan Huang & Ehsan Elahi, 2022. "Farmers’ Preferences for Recycling Pesticide Packaging Waste: An Implication of a Discrete Choice Experiment Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-13, October.
    17. Santos, Rui & Clemente, Pedro & Brouwer, Roy & Antunes, Paula & Pinto, Rute, 2015. "Landowner preferences for agri-environmental agreements to conserve the montado ecosystem in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 159-167.
    18. Peter Haan & Arne Uhlendorff, 2006. "Estimation of multinomial logit models with unobserved heterogeneity using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(2), pages 229-245, June.
    19. José Murteira & Óscar Lourenço, 2011. "Health care utilization and self-assessed health: specification of bivariate models using copulas," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 447-472, October.
    20. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Lexicographic Preferences in Discrete Choice Experiments: Consequences on Individual-Specific Willingness to Pay Estimates," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12224, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:lsu:lsuwpp:2014-11. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delsuus.html .

    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.