Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Attending to the Reasons for Attribute Non-attendance in Choice Experiments

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on behavioural reasons underlying stated attribute non-attendance in choice experiments. In order to identify and incorporate procedures for dealing with heterogeneous attribute processing strategies, we ask respondents follow-up questions regarding their reasons for ignoring attributes. Based on these statements, we conclude that the standard way of assigning a zero impact of ignored attributes on the likelihood is inappropriate. We find that some respondents act in accordance with the passive bounded rationality assumption since they ignore an attribute simply because it does not affect their utility. Excluding these genuine zero preferences, as the standard approach essentially does, might bias results. Other respondents claim to have ignored attributes to simplify choices. However, we find that these respondents have actually not completely ignored attributes. We argue along the rationally adaptive behavioural model that valid preference information may indeed be elicited in these cases, and we illustrate how recoding of non-attendance statements conditional on stated reasons may be a more appropriate solution than the current standard way of taking stated non-attendance into account.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AIC:

Akaike’s information criterion

ASC:

Alternative specific constant

BIC:

Bayesian information criterion

CE:

Choice experiment

ECL:

Error component logit

INA:

Inferred non-attendance

LCM:

Latent class model

LL:

Log-likelihood

MNL:

Multinomial logit model

RPECL:

Random parameter error component logit

RPL:

Random parameter logit

SNA:

Stated non-attendance

WTP:

Willingness to pay

References

  • Araña JE, Leon CJ (2009) Understanding the use of non-compensatory decision rules in discrete choice experiments: the role of emotions. Ecol Econ 68(8–9): 2316–2326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arentze T, Borgers A, Timmermans H, Del Mistro R (2003) Transport stated choice responses: effects of task complexity, presentation format and literacy. Transp Res E Log Transp Rev 39(3): 229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balcombe K, Burton M, Rigby D (2011) Skew and attribute non-attendance within the Bayesian mixed logit model. J Environ Econ Manag 62(3): 446–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman IJ, Burgess D, Hutchinson WG, Matthews D (2008) Learning design contingent valuation (LDCV): NOAA guidelines, preference learning and coherent arbitrariness. J Environ Econ Manag 55(2): 27–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierlaire M (2003) BIOGEME: a free package for the estimation of discrete choice models. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Swiss transportation research conference, Ascona, Switzerland

  • Brownstone D, Train K (1999) Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns. J Economet 89: 109–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron TA, De Shazo JR (2010) Differential attention to attributes in utility-theoretic choice models. J Choice Model 3(3): 73–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell D (2008) Identification and analysis of discontinuous preferences in discrete choice experiments. Paper presented at the 16th annual conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economics, Gothenburg, Sweden, 25–28 June 2008

  • Campbell D, Hutchinson WG, Scarpa R (2008) Incorporating discontinuous preferences in to the analysis of discrete choice experiments. Environ Resour Econ 41(3): 401–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell D, Lorimer VS (2009) Accommodating attribute processing strategies in stated choice analysis: do respondents do what they say they do? Paper presented at the 17th annual conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economics, Amsterdam, Holland, 24–27 June 2009

  • Campbell D, Lorimer VS, Aravena C, Hutchinson WG (2010) Attribute processing in environmental choice analysis: implications for willingness to pay. Paper presented at the Agricultural Economics Society Annual Conference, Edinburgh, 29–31 March 2010

  • Carlsson F, Kataria M, Lampi E (2010) Dealing with ignored attributes in choice experiments on valuation of Sweden’s environmental quality objectives. Environ Resour Econ 47: 65–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caussade S, Ortúzar JdD, Rizzi LI, Hensher DA (2005) Assessing the influence of design dimensions on stated choice experiment estimates. Transp Res B 39(7): 621–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo S, Hanley N, Christie M (2011) What are the consequences of ignoring attributes in choice experiments? An application to ecosystem service values. Stirling Economics Discussion Paper 2011-2020. University of Stirling

  • Dekker T, Hess S, Brouwer R, Hofkes M (2012) Accounting for preference certainty in stated choice experiments using a latent variable approach. Paper presented at the 19th annual EAERE conference in Prague, 27–30 June 2012

  • DeShazo JR, Fermo G (2004) Implications of rationally-adaptive pre-choice behaviour for the design and estimation of choice models. Working paper, School of Public Policy and Social Research, University of California, Los Angeles

  • Ericsson A, Simon H (1980) Verbal reports as data. Psychol Rev 8: 215–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gowdy JM, Mayumi K (2001) Reformulating the foundations of consumer choice theory and environmental valuation. Ecol Econ 39: 223–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene WH, Hensher DA (2007) Heteroscedastic control for random coefficients and error components in mixed logit. Transp Res E 43(5): 610–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH (2005) The Implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes. Transp J 32: 203–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA, Greene WH (2003) The mixed logit model: the state of practice. Transp J 30(2): 133–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA (2004) Identifying the influence of stated choice design dimensionality on willingness to pay for travel time savings. J Transp Econ Pol 38(3): 425–446

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA (2006) How do respondents process stated choice experiments? Attribute consideration under varying information load. J Appl Econ 21: 861–878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA (2007) Attribute processing in choice experiments and implications on willingness to pay. In: Kanninen BJ (ed) Valuing environmental amenities using stated choice studies. Springer, The Netherlands, pp 135–157

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA (2010) Attribute processing, heuristics and preference construction in choice analysis. (invitational keynote paper for choice modelling conference, Leeds UK, March 30-April 1 2009). In: Hess S, Daly A (eds) State-of art and state-of practice in choice modelling. Emerald Press, UK, pp 35–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA, Rose JM, Bertoia T (2007) The implication on willingness to pay of a stochastic treatment of attribute processing in stated choice studies. Transp Res E 43: 73–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA, Rose JM (2009) Simplifying choice through attribute preservation or non-attendance: implications for willingness to pay. Transp Res E 45(4): 583–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA, Greene WH (2010) Non-attendance and dual processing of common-metric attributes in choice analysis: a latent class specification. Empir Econ 39(2): 413–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH (2012) Inferring attribute non-attendance from stated choice data: implication for willingness to pay estimates and a warning for stated choice experiment design. Transp J 39: 235–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herriges JA, Phaneuf D (2002) Inducing patterns of correlation and substitution in repeated nested logit models of recreation demand. Am J Agric Econ 84(4): 1076–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess S (2012) Impact of unimportant attribute in stated choice surveys. Paper presented at the transportation research board 91st annual meeting, Washington DC, 22–26 January 2012

  • Hess S, Hensher DA (2010) Using conditioning on observed choices to retrieve individual-specific attribute processing strategies. Transp Res B 44(6): 781–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess S, Hensher DA (2012) Making use of respondent reported processing information to understand attribute importance: a latent variable scaling approach. Transp J. doi:10.1007/s11116-012-9420-y

  • Hess S, Rose JM (2009) Allowing for intra-respondent variations in coefficients estimated on stated preference data. Transp Res B 43(6): 708–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess S, Stathopoulos A (2011) Linking response quality to survey engagement: a combined random scale and latent variable approach. Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, ITS Working Paper

  • Hole AR (2011a) A discrete choice model with endogenous attribute attendance. Econ Lett 110(3): 203–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hole AR (2011b) Attribute non-attendance in patients’ choice of general practitioner appointment. Paper presented at the second International Choice Modelling Conference, Leeds UK. 4–6 July 2011

  • Jorgensen BS, Syme GJ, Bishop BJ, Nancarrow BE (1999) Protest responses in contingent valuation. Environ Resour Econ 14(1): 131–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaye-Blake WH, Abell WL, Zellman E (2009) Respondents’ ignoring of attribute information in a choice modelling survey. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 53(4): 547–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kragt M (2012) Attribute attendance in choice experiments: exploring issues of scale and attribute framing. Paper presented at the 19th annual EAERE conference in Prague, 27–30 June 2012

  • Lancsar E, Louviere JJ (2006) Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiment: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?. Health Econ 15: 797–811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood M (1996) Non-compensatory preference structure in non-market valuation of natural area policy. Aust J Agric Econ 40(2): 85–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mariel P, Boeri M., Meyerhoff J, Hoyos D (2012) Dealing with controversial and non-attended attributes in discrete choice experiments. Paper presented at the 19th annual conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economics, Prague, Czech Republic, 27–30 June 2012

  • Meyerhoff J, Liebe U (2006) Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: explaining their motivation. Ecol Econ 57(4): 583–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerhoff J, Liebe U (2009) Discontinuous preferences in choice experiments: Evidence at the choice task level. Paper presented at the 17th annual conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economics, Amsterdam, Holland, 24–27 June 2009

  • Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1989) Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison MD, Blamey RK, Bennett JW (2000) Minimising payment vehicle bias in contingent valuation studies. Environ Resour Econ 16(4): 407–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne JW, Bettman JR, Coupey E, Johnson EJ (1992) A constructive process view of decision making: multiple strategies in judgment and choices. Acta Psycol 80: 107–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puckett SM, Hensher DA (2008) The role of attribute processing strategies in estimating the preferences of road freight stakeholders. Transp Res E 44(3): 379–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puckett SM, Hensher DA (2009) Revealing the extent of preference heterogeneity in choice analysis: an empirical assessment. Transp Res A 43(2): 117–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose JM, Hensher DA, Caussade S, Ortúzar JdD, Jou RC (2009) Identifying differences in willingness to pay due to dimensionality in stated choice experiments: a cross country analysis. J Transp Geogr 17(1): 21–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberger RS, Peterson GL, Clarke A, Brown TC (2003) Measuring dispositions for lexicographic preferences of environmental goods: integrating economics, psychology and ethics. Ecol Econ 44: 63–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M, Watson V, Entwistle V (2009) Rationalizing the irrational: a think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses. Health Econ 18: 321–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sælensminde K (2001) Inconsistent choices in stated choice data: use of the logit scaling approach to handle resulting variance increases. Transp J 28: 269–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa R, Gilbride TJ, Campbell D, Hensher DA (2009) Modelling attribute non-attendance in choice experiment for rural landscape valuation. Eur Rev Agric Econ 36: 151–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa R, Ferrini S, Willis K (2005) Performance of error component models for status-quo effects in choice experiments. In: Scarpa R, Alberini A (eds) Applications of simulation methods in environmental and resource economics. The economics of non-market goods and resources, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 247–273

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa R, Willis K, Acutt M (2007) Valuing externalities from water supply: status quo, choice complexity, and individual random effects in panel kernel logit analysis of choice experiments. J Environ Plan Manag 50: 449–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa R, Thiene M, Marangon F (2008) Using flexible taste distributions to value collective reputation for environmentally friendly production methods. Can J Agric Econ 56(2): 145–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa R, Thiene M, Hensher DA (2010) Monitoring choice task attribute attendance in nonmarket valuation of multiple park management services: does it atter?. Land Econ 86(4): 817–839

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa R, Raffaelli R, Notaro S, Louviere JJ (2011) Modelling the effects of stated attribute non-attendance on its inference: an application to visitors benefits from the alpine grazing commons. Paper presented at the second international choice modelling conference, Leeds UK. 4–6 July 2011

  • Scarpa R, Zanoli R, Bruschi V, Naspetti S (2012) Inferred and stated attribute non-attendance in food choice experiements. Am J Agric Econ

  • Train KE (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Science, Aarhus University, Frederiksborgvej 399, 4000, Roskilde, Denmark

    Mohammed Hussen Alemu

  2. Department of Business and Economics, COHERE, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Morten Raun Mørkbak

  3. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, Life Science Faculty, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958, Frederiksberg C, Denmark

    Søren Bøye Olsen & Carsten Lynge Jensen

Authors
  1. Mohammed Hussen Alemu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Morten Raun Mørkbak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Søren Bøye Olsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carsten Lynge Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Søren Bøye Olsen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alemu, M.H., Mørkbak, M.R., Olsen, S.B. et al. Attending to the Reasons for Attribute Non-attendance in Choice Experiments. Environ Resource Econ 54, 333–359 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-012-9597-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-012-9597-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation