Differential Attention to Attributes in Utility-Theoretic Choice Models

被引:1
|
作者
Cameron, Trudy Ann [1 ]
DeShazo, J. R. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Dept Econ, 435 PLC,1285 Univ Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403 USA
[2] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Publ Policy, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[3] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Inst Environm, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
关键词
Attention to Attributes; Allocation of Attention; Conjoint Choice; Choice Set Design; Bounded Rationality; Choice Heuristics; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; CONSUMER CHOICE; DECISION; COMPLEXITY; CONFLICT; BEHAVIOR; ORIGIN;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
We show in a theoretical model that the benefit from additional attention to the marginal attribute within a choice set depends upon the expected utility loss from making a suboptimal choice if it is ignored. Guided by this analysis, we then develop an empirical method to measure an individual's propensity to attend to attributes. As a proof of concept, we offer an empirical example of our method using a conjoint analysis of demand for programs to reduce health risks. Our results suggest that respondents differentially allocate attention across attributes as a function of the mix of attribute levels in a choice set. This behaviour can cause researchers who fail to model attention allocation to estimate incorrectly the marginal utilities derived from selected attributes. This illustrative example is a first attempt to implement an attention-corrected choice model with a sample of field data from a conjoint choice experiment.
引用
收藏
页码:73 / 115
页数:43
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] UTILITY-THEORETIC INDEXING
    WILSON, P
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 1979, 30 (03): : 169 - 170
  • [2] FOUNDATIONS OF PROBABILISTIC AND UTILITY-THEORETIC INDEXING
    COOPER, WS
    MARON, ME
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ACM, 1978, 25 (01) : 67 - 80
  • [3] Utility-Theoretic Ranking for Semiautomated Text Classification
    Berardi, Giacomo
    Esuli, Andrea
    Sebastiani, Fabrizio
    [J]. ACM TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY FROM DATA, 2015, 10 (01)
  • [4] UTILITY-THEORETIC INDEXING - NOTE ON WILSONS NOTE
    COOPER, WS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 1979, 30 (03): : 170 - 172
  • [5] UTILITY-THEORETIC VERSUS RELEVANCE-THEORETIC MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS
    COOPER, WS
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 1976, 13 : 44 - 44
  • [6] A Utility-Theoretic Approach to Privacy in Online Services
    Krause, Andreas
    Horvitz, Eric
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH, 2010, 39 : 633 - 662
  • [7] A utility-theoretic model for QALYs and willingness to pay
    Klose, T
    [J]. HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2003, 12 (01) : 17 - 31
  • [8] Analysis of utility-theoretic heuristics for intelligent adaptive network routing
    Mikler, AR
    Honavar, V
    Wong, SK
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRTEENTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE EIGHTH INNOVATIVE APPLICATIONS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CONFERENCE, VOLS 1 AND 2, 1996, : 96 - 101
  • [9] A Utility-Theoretic Ranking Method for Semi-Automated Text Classification
    Berardi, Giacomo
    Esuli, Andrea
    Sebastiani, Fabrizio
    [J]. SIGIR 2012: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 35TH INTERNATIONAL ACM SIGIR CONFERENCE ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN INFORMATION RETRIEVAL, 2012, : 961 - 970
  • [10] Utility-theoretic information retrieval, cognitive hacking, and intelligence and security informatics
    Thompson, P
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7TH JOINT CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION SCIENCES, 2003, : 452 - 454