Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Process and context in choice models

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We develop a general framework that extends choice models by including an explicit representation of the process and context of decision making. Process refers to the steps involved in decision making. Context refers to factors affecting the process, focusing in this paper on social networks. The extended choice framework includes more behavioral richness through the explicit representation of the planning process preceding an action and its dynamics and the effects of context (family, friends, and market) on the process leading to a choice, as well as the inclusion of new types of subjective data in choice models. We discuss the key issues involved in applying the extended framework, focusing on richer data requirements, theories, and models, and present three partial demonstrations of the proposed framework. Future research challenges include the development of more comprehensive empirical tests of the extended modeling framework.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Neal (2006) for evidence on these claims.

References

  • Abou-Zeid, M., & Ben-Akiva, M. (2010). A model of travel happiness and mode switching. In S. Hess, & A. Daly (Eds.), Choice modelling: the state-of-the-art and the state-of-practice. Proceedings from the Inaugural International Choice Modelling Conference. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 289–306.

  • Akerlof, G., & Kranton, R. (2002). Identity and schooling: some lessons for the economics of education. Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 1167–1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apps, P. F., & Rees, R. (1997). Collective labor supply and household production. Journal of Political Economy, 105, 178–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, F. (1969). A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Science, 15(5), 215–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I., & Munro, A. (2005). An experiment on risky choice amongst households. The Economic Journal, 115(502), 176–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M. (2010). Planning and action in a model of choice. In S. Hess, & A. Daly (Eds.), Choice modelling: the state-of-the-art and the state-of-practice. Proceedings from the Inaugural International Choice Modelling Conference. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 19–34.

  • Ben-Akiva, M., McFadden, D., Train, K., Walker, J., Bhat, C., Bierlaire, M., et al. (2002). Hybrid choice models: progress and challenges. Marketing Letters, 13(3), 163–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, S., Levinsohn, J., & Pakes, A. (1995). Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica, 63, 841–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, S., Levinsohn, J., & Pakes, A. (2004). Differentiated products demand systems from a combination of micro and macro data: the new vehicle market. Journal of Political Economy, 112(1), 68–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blume, L., Brock, W., Durlauf, S., & Ioannides, Y. (2010). Identification of social interactions. In J. Benhabib, A. Bisin, & M. Jackson (Eds.), Handbook of social economics. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blundell, R. W., Chiappori, P. A., & Meghir, C. (2005). Collective labor supply with children. Journal of Political Economy, 113(6), 1277–1306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock, W., & Durlauf, S. (2001). Discrete choice with social interactions. Review of Economic Studies, 68, 235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock, W., & Durlauf, S. (2006). Multinomial choice with social interactions. In L. Blume & S. Durlauf (Eds.), The economy as an evolving complex system III. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browning, M., & Chiappori, P. A. (1998). Efficient intra-household allocation: a general characterization and empirical tests. Econometrica, 66(6), 1241–1278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carneiro, P., Heckman, J., & Masterov, D. (2005). Labor market discrimination and racial differences in premarket factors. Journal of Law and Economics, 48, 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrasco, J. A., Hogan, B., Wellman, B., & Miller, E. J. (2006). Collecting social network data to study social activity-travel behavior: an egocentric approach. Paper presented at the 85th Transportation Research Board Meeting, Washington, DC.

  • Chen, Z., & Woolley, F. (2001). A Cournot–Nash model of family decision making. The Economic Journal, 111, 722–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiappori, P. A. (1988). Rational household labor supply. Econometrica, 56(1), 63–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiappori, P. A. (1992). Collective labor supply and welfare. Journal of Political Economy, 100, 437–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiappori, P. A., & Ekeland, I. (2009). The micro economics of efficient group behavior: identification. Econometrica, 77(3), 763–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. (1966). Medical innovation: a diffusion study. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Palma, A., Picard, N., & Ziegelmeyer, A. (2011). Individual and couple decision behavior under risk: evidence on the dynamics of power balance. Theory and Decision, 70(1), 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delavande, A. (2008). Pill, patch, or shot? Subjective expectations and birth-control choice. International Economic Review, 49, 999–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuda, D., & Morichi, S. (2007). Incorporating aggregate behavior in an individual’s discrete choice: an application to analyzing illegal bicycle parking behavior. Transportation Research Part A, 41, 313–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. (2008). Social and economic networks. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 375–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, N. L., Ayanian, J. Z., Cleary, P. D., & Marsden, P. V. (2007). Factors affecting influential discussions among physicians: a social network analysis of a primary care practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22(6), 794–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivetz, R., Netzer, O., & Srinivasan, V. (2004). Alternative models for capturing the compromise effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 41, 237–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C. (1993). Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Review of Economic Studies, 60, 531–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C. (2002). Identification of decision rules in experiments on simple games of proposal and response. European Economic Review, 46, 880–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C. (2004). Measuring expectations. Econometrica, 72, 1329–1376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manski, C. (2010). When consensus choice dominates individualism: Jensen’s inequality and collective decisions under uncertainty. Quantitative Economics, 1(1), 187–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. (1999). Rationality for economists? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1–3), 73–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neal, D. (2006). Why has black-white skill convergence stopped? In E. Hanushek & F. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogbu, J. (2003). Black Americans in an affluent suburb. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. L., Ehlers, E., Banerjee, I., & Dugundji, E. R. (2011). Correcting for endogeneity in behavioral choice models with social influence variables. Transportation Research Part A, 45(4), 362–374.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA

    Moshe Ben-Akiva

  2. Ecole Normale Supérieure de Cachan, 61 avenue du président Wilson, Cachan, 94235, France

    André de Palma

  3. University of California at Berkeley, 508-1 Evans Hall #3880, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA

    Daniel McFadden

  4. American University of Beirut, P.O.Box 11-0236, Riad El-Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon

    Maya Abou-Zeid

  5. Columbia University, 1009A International Affairs Building, MC 3308, 420 West 118th Street, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Pierre-André Chiappori

  6. Institut Français des Sciences et Technologies des Transports, de l’Aménagement et des Réseaux, 2 rue de la Butte Verte, Noisy-le-Grand Cedex, 93166, France

    Matthieu de Lapparent

  7. Department of Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1180 Observatory Drive, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Steven N. Durlauf

  8. Technical University of Denmark, Bygningstorvet 116 Vest 2800 DK-Kgs, Lyngby, Denmark

    Mogens Fosgerau

  9. Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1-M1-11 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, 1528552, Tokyo, Japan

    Daisuke Fukuda

  10. Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    Stephane Hess

  11. Northwestern University, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA

    Charles Manski

  12. Department of Economics, Harvard University, Room 117 Littauer Center, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA

    Ariel Pakes

  13. Université de Cergy-Pontoise, Thema, 33 Boulevard du Port, 95011, Cergy-Pontoise Cedex, France

    Nathalie Picard

  14. University of California at Berkeley, 111 McLaughlin Hall, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA

    Joan Walker

Authors
  1. Moshe Ben-Akiva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. André de Palma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel McFadden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maya Abou-Zeid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pierre-André Chiappori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Matthieu de Lapparent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Steven N. Durlauf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mogens Fosgerau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Daisuke Fukuda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Stephane Hess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Charles Manski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Ariel Pakes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Nathalie Picard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Joan Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moshe Ben-Akiva.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ben-Akiva, M., de Palma, A., McFadden, D. et al. Process and context in choice models. Mark Lett 23, 439–456 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-012-9180-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-012-9180-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation