Random utility models customarily assume strict independence of individual decision makers. Evidence of crowding, peer pressure, herd behavior, and other instances of spontaneous discrete choice coordination indicates that decision makers interact and thus affect choices made by others. Socially influenced individual choices become biased toward either agreeing with or contradicting the choices made by peers. Because many social interdependencies are spatial, a basic spatial discrete choice model was obtained by extending random utility theory to discrete choices made by heterogeneous spatially dependent individuals. Although interdependencies are unobserved, the model permits the study of behavioral biases arising from spatial interdependencies. The spatial discrete choice model is shown to address the effects of behavioral biases on conditional choice probabilities, the marginal effects of exogenous variables on revealed preferences, and the spatial patterns of discrete choices. A pseudo maximum likelihood (PML) estimator for the model is developed, and closed-form expressions for conditional choice probability estimates are derived. The PML estimator is shown to be consistent and computationally feasible for large spatial data sets. Simulated data were used to illustrate the performance of the PML estimator for the spatial discrete choice model.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BhatC., and ZhaoH.The Spatial Analysis of Activity Stop Generation. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 36, No. 6, 2002, pp. 557–575.
2.
BhatC. R., and GuoJ.A Mixed Spatially Correlated Logit Model: Formulation and Application to Residential Choice Modeling. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 38, No. 2, 2004, pp. 147–168.
3.
KoppelmanF. S., and SethiV.Incorporating Variance and Covariance Heterogeneity in the Generalized Nested Logit Model: An Application to Modeling Long Distance Travel Choice Behavior. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 9, 2005, pp. 825–853.
4.
LouviereJ., TrainK., Ben-AkivaM., BhatC., BrownstoneD., CameronT. A., CarsonR. T., DeshzoJ. R., FiebigD., GreenW., HensherD., and WaldmanD.Recent Progress on Endogeneity in Choice Modeling. Marketing Letters, Vol. 16, No. 3-4, 2005, pp. 255–265.
5.
MohammadianA., HaiderM., and KanaroglouP. S.Incorporating Spatial Dependencies in Random Parameter Discrete Choice Models. Presented at 84th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2005.
6.
SivakumarA., and BhatC. R.Comprehensive, Unified Framework for Analyzing Spatial Location Choice. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2003, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 103–111.
7.
BekhorS., and PrashkerJ. N.GEV-Based Destination Choice Models that Account for Unobserved Similarities Among Alternatives. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 42, No. 3, 2008, pp. 243–262.
8.
SmirnovO. A.Modeling Spatial Discrete Choice. Regional Science and Urban Economics (in press).
9.
AnselinL.Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models, Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 1988.
10.
KelejianH. H., and RobinsonD. P.A Suggested Test for Spatial Autocorrelation and/or Heteroskedasticity and Corresponding Monte Carlo Results. Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 28, No. 4, 1998, pp. 389–417.
11.
McMillenD. P.Probit with Spatial Autocorrelation. Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 32, No. 3, 1992, pp. 335–348.
12.
DugundjiE. R., and WalkerJ. L.Discrete Choice with Social and Spatial Network Interdependencies: An Empirical Example Using Mixed Generalized Extreme Value Models with Field and Panel Effects. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1921, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 70–78.
13.
WalkerJ. L., and LiJ.Latent Lifestyle Preferences and Household Location Decisions. Journal of Geographical Systems, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2007, pp. 77–101.
14.
DugundjiE. R., and GulyásL.Sociodynamic Discrete Choice on Networks in Space: Impacts of Agent Heterogeneity on Emergent Outcomes. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 35, No. 6, 2008, pp. 1028–1054.
15.
McFaddenD.Modeling the Choice of Residential Location. In Spatial Interaction Theory and Residential Location (KarlqvistA., eds.), North–Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1978, pp. 75–96.
16.
Ben-AkivaM. E., and LermanS. R.Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. MIT Press Series in Transportation Studies, Vol. 9, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
17.
TrainK. E.Discrete Choice Methods with Simulations.Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003.
18.
PesendorferW.Behavioral Economics Comes of Age: A Review Essay on Advances in Behavioral Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 44, Sept. 2006, pp. 712–721.
19.
BierlaireM., BolducD., and McFaddenD.The Estimation of Generalized Extreme Value Models from Choice-Based Samples. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 42, No. 4, 2008, pp. 381–394.
20.
AbrahamJ. E., and HuntJ. D.Random Utility Location, Production, and Exchange Choice; Additive Logit Model; and Spatial Choice Microsimulations. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2003, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 1–6.
21.
EluruN., PinjariA. R., GuoJ. Y., SenerI. N., SrinivasanS., CoppermanR. B., and BhatC. R.Population Updating System Structures and Models Embedded in the Comprehensive Econometric Microsimulator for Urban Systems. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2076, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 171–182.
22.
ZhangK., MahmassaniH. S., and LuC.-C.Probit-Based Time-Dependent Stochastic User Equilibrium Traffic Assignment Model. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2085, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 86–94.
23.
KimJ.-H., ChungJ.-H., KimI., and LimU.Spatial Dependence in Trip Generation Models: Spatial Econometric Perspective. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
24.
KlierT., and McMillenD. P.Clustering of Auto Supplier Plants in the United States: Generalized Method of Moments Spatial Logit for Large Samples. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 460–471.
25.
BhatC. R., and SenerI. N.Copula-Based Closed-Form Binary Logit Choice Model for Accommodating Spatial Correlation Across Observational Units. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
26.
GarridoR. A., and LevaM.Port of Destination and Carrier Selection for Fruit Exports: A Multi-dimensional Space-Time Multinomial Probit Model. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 38, No. 7, 2004, pp. 657–667.
27.
SmirnovO. A., and EganK. J.Spatial Random Utility Model with an Application to Recreation Demand.Department of Economics, University of Toledo, Ohio, 2009.
28.
GrahamB. S.Identifying Social Interactions Through Conditional Variance Restrictions. Econometrica, Vol. 76, No. 3, 2008, pp. 643–660.
29.
HartmannW. R., ManchandaP., NairH., BothnerM., DoddsP., GodesD., HosanagarK., and TuckerC.Modeling Social Interactions: Identification, Empirical Methods and Policy Implications. Marketing Letters, Vol. 19, No. 3-4, 2008, pp. 287–304.
30.
SmirnovO. A., and AnselinL. E.An O(N) Parallel Method of Computing the Log-Jacobian of the Variable Transformation for Models with Spatial Interaction on a Lattice. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, Vol. 53, No. 8, 2009, pp. 2980–2988.
31.
LeeL.-F.Asymptotic Distributions of Quasi-Maximum Likelihood Estimators for Spatial Autoregressive Models. Econometrica, Vol. 72, No. 6, 2004, pp. 1899–1925.
32.
AnselinL.Under the Hood: Issues in the Specification and Interpretation of Spatial Regression Models. Agricultural Economics, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2002, pp. 247–267.
33.
SmirnovO.Computation of the Information Matrix for the Models of Spatial Interaction on a Lattice. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2005, pp. 910–927.
