COMPARING ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF HETEROGENEITY IN CONSUMER CHOICE BEHAVIOR
消费者选择行为异质性的替代模型比较AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确比较消费者离散选择中的多种 logit 与潜在类别模型。
反馈分类问题消费者选择行为异质性的替代模型比较AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
SUMMARY When modeling demand for differentiated products, it is vital to adequately capture consumer taste heterogeneity, But there is no clearly preferred approach. Here, we compare the performance of six alternative models. Currently, the most popular are mixed logit (MIXL), particularly the version with normal mixing (N‐MIXL), and latent class (LC), which assumes discrete consumer types. Recently, several alternative models have been developed. The 'generalized multinomial logit' (G‐MNL) extends N‐MIXL by allowing for heterogeneity in the logit scale coefficient. Scale heterogeneity logit (S‐MNL) is a special case of G‐MNL with scale heterogeneity only. The 'mixed‐mixed' logit (MM‐MNL) assumes a discrete mixture‐of‐normals heterogeneity distribution. Finally, one can modify N‐MIXL by imposing theoretical sign constraints on vertical attributes. We call this 'T‐MIXL'. We find that none of these models dominates the others, but G‐MNL, MM‐MNL and T‐MIXL typically outperform the popular N‐MIXL and LC models. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.