Important: Read this before posting to this forum

  1. This forum is for questions related to the use of Apollo. We will answer some general choice modelling questions too, where appropriate, and time permitting. We cannot answer questions about how to estimate choice models with other software packages.
  2. There is a very detailed manual for Apollo available at http://www.ApolloChoiceModelling.com/manual.html. This contains detailed descriptions of the various Apollo functions, and numerous examples are available at http://www.ApolloChoiceModelling.com/examples.html. In addition, help files are available for all functions, using e.g. ?apollo_mnl
  3. Before asking a question on the forum, users are kindly requested to follow these steps:
    1. Check that the same issue has not already been addressed in the forum - there is a search tool.
    2. Ensure that the correct syntax has been used. For any function, detailed instructions are available directly in Apollo, e.g. by using ?apollo_mnl for apollo_mnl
    3. Check the frequently asked questions section on the Apollo website, which discusses some common issues/failures. Please see http://www.apollochoicemodelling.com/faq.html
    4. Make sure that R is using the latest official release of Apollo.
  4. If the above steps do not resolve the issue, then users should follow these steps when posting a question:
    1. provide full details on the issue, including the entire code and output, including any error messages
    2. posts will not immediately appear on the forum, but will be checked by a moderator first. This may take a day or two at busy times. There is no need to submit the post multiple times.

Best way to model directly correlated attributes.

Ask general questions about model specification and estimation that are not Apollo specific but relevant to Apollo users.
Post Reply
Niranjan
Posts: 12
Joined: 01 Feb 2021, 23:27

Best way to model directly correlated attributes.

Post by Niranjan »

Hello everyone,

I am running a mixed logit model from unlabeled stated choice experiment with four attributes.

I will try to explain in general a similar situation to my problem.

1) Attribute A
2) Attribute B
3) Cash back
4) Total Cost

Now i can think of three ways to estimate the parameters

a) Keeping everything same and estimating parameters for all the four attributes.

b) I make slight modifications to the data after data collection as following and estimate four parameters.

1) Attribute A
2) Attribute B
3) Cash back
4) Net cost = (Total cost - Cash back)

c) Reducing the four attributes to three after data collection and estimate 3 parameters.

1) Attribute A
2) Attribute B
3) Net cost ( Total cost - Cash back)

Now here are some outputs scenarios from different models and i want direction on which is the best way to model.

- For model a) and b) the final likelihood are almost same with similar AIC and BIC estimates but the correlation between the parameter
estimates from a) for Cash back and Total Cost is higher than the correlation between the estimates of b) between Cash back and Net cost which seems obvious (and correlation among other attributes also reduces). The parameter estimates of Attribute A and Attribute B changes in small magnitude compared to that of cash back parameter, parameter estimate for cost also changes significantly but not as much as with the magnitude of Cash back (Cash back parameter has high significant change).


Again modelling as per the c) the models worsen comparatively more slightly (with LL: may be with reduction in explaining variables) and the parameter estimates of attribute A and B changes slightly but Net Cost has a significant change.


So, my question here is as the questions were asked in format a) should i stick with design a), or as correlation between attributes (among all) reduces in model b) should i use model b) assuming the respondents had attribute processing strategy while selecting the alternatives or even model c). (my questions comes as these different results shows different tradeoff values and i am sorry if this is in fact a straight forward question).
stephanehess
Site Admin
Posts: 974
Joined: 24 Apr 2020, 16:29

Re: Best way to model directly correlated attributes.

Post by stephanehess »

Hi

my view is as follows:

model a) is the one that corresponds to the data as shown to the respondent (I believe) and makes no assumptions about i) whether people react differently to cash back and cost (which is quite likely to be the case) and ii) whether people can calculate (which is quite unlikely to be the case from my experience).

model b) already makes an assumption that people can calculate and also that the reduction in cost is valued the same way as in increase, although you still allow for a separate effect for cash back.

model c) assumes that people can calculate and that cash back has the direct opposite effect of cost.

It seems like your data is clearly rejecting c) and possibly also b) as you say there are small differences. I would look at model a) and test the difference between the parameters

Stephane
--------------------------------
Stephane Hess
www.stephanehess.me.uk
Niranjan
Posts: 12
Joined: 01 Feb 2021, 23:27

Re: Best way to model directly correlated attributes.

Post by Niranjan »

Thank you for the swift response Dr. Hess, what do you mean by test the difference between parameters in last part?
stephanehess
Site Admin
Posts: 974
Joined: 24 Apr 2020, 16:29

Re: Best way to model directly correlated attributes.

Post by stephanehess »

Hi

I mean testing whether the parameters for cash back and cost are significantly different from each other, using e.g. the delta method

Stephane
--------------------------------
Stephane Hess
www.stephanehess.me.uk
Post Reply