This paper investigates alternative methods to account for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments. Heterogeneity can be explained by assuming its influence to impact the systematic component of utility, the stochastic one or both. Seven different models were estimated to search for heterogeneity along the three dimensions described. The comparison based on model performance and willingness to pay measures shows that methods to search for heterogeneity are not independent one from the other and might produce substantially different results giving rise to different policy implications.

Marcucci, E., Gatta, V. (2012). Dissecting preference heterogeneity in consumer stated choices. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART E-LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW, 48(1), 331-339 [10.1016/j.tre.2011.08.003].

Dissecting preference heterogeneity in consumer stated choices

MARCUCCI, EDOARDO;GATTA, VALERIO
2012-01-01

Abstract

This paper investigates alternative methods to account for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments. Heterogeneity can be explained by assuming its influence to impact the systematic component of utility, the stochastic one or both. Seven different models were estimated to search for heterogeneity along the three dimensions described. The comparison based on model performance and willingness to pay measures shows that methods to search for heterogeneity are not independent one from the other and might produce substantially different results giving rise to different policy implications.
2012
Marcucci, E., Gatta, V. (2012). Dissecting preference heterogeneity in consumer stated choices. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART E-LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW, 48(1), 331-339 [10.1016/j.tre.2011.08.003].
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11590/137394
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 67
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 62
social impact