Modeling Constrained Choice Behaviour in Regulated Housing Markets by Means of Discrete Choice Experiments and Universal Logit Models: An Application to the Residential Choice Behaviour of Divorcees
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 1996
Modeling Constrained Choice Behaviour in Regulated Housing Markets by Means of Discrete Choice Experiments and Universal Logit Models: An Application to the Residential Choice Behaviour of Divorcees
In present choice models, it is assumed that the composition of individuals' choice sets does not affect their utilities. Preferences and choice behaviour are assumed to be independent of context. The constraints that individuals face are not modeled explicitly in the residential choice literature. In this paper we aim to propose and demonstrate how discrete choice experiments and universal logit models may be used to estimate choice models that permit one to measure and test the effects of constraints on housing choice behaviour and residential preferences. In particular, we wish to test whether preferences of divorcees are invariant with differential access to housing-market segments. The empirical findings obtained in the present study of residential choices of divorcees generally support the idea that access to particular segments affects the preference for other segments differentially. Estimated attribute effects were in anticipated directions, although not all were significant. The choice model, including the effects representing access to particular housing-market segments, outperformed the multinomial logit model at conventional probability levels, and odds ratios were shown to change dramatically as a function of the constraints on residential choice behaviour.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonD AWileyJ B, 1992, “Efficient choice set designs for estimating availability cross-effects”Marketing Letters3357–370
2.
AndersonN H, 1974, “Information integration theory: A brief survey”, in Contemporary Developments in Mathematical Psychology Eds KrantzDAtkinsonRLuceDSuppesPW H Freeman, San Francisco, CA) pp 236–305
3.
AndersonN H, 1981Foundations of Information Integration Theory (Academic Press, New York)
4.
AndersonN H, 1982Methods of Information Integration (Academic Press, New York)
5.
AndersonD ABorgersA W JEttemaDTimmermansH J P, 1993, “Estimating availability effects in travel choice modelling: A stated choice approach”Transportation Research Recordnumber 1357, 51–65
6.
AufhauserEFischerM MSchöndorferM, 1986, “A disaggregated probabilistic approach to a regulated housing market with emphasis on the demand side: The Vienna case”Papers of the Regional Science Association60133–153
7.
BenjaminJPaaswellR E, 1981, “A psychometric analysis of residential location”Socio-Economic Planning Sciences15305–319
8.
BibleD SBrownL A, 1981, “Place utility, attribute tradeoff, and choice behavior in an intra-urban migration context”Socio-Economic Planning Sciences1537–44
9.
BorgersA W JTimmermansH J PVeldhuisenK J, 1986, “A hybrid compensatory — noncompensatory model of residential preference structures”The Netherlands Journal of Housing and Environmental Research1227–233
10.
BrownL AMooreE G, 1970, “The intraurban migration process: A perspective”Geografiska Annaler52B1–13
11.
BrumwellA C, 1979, “A model of intraurban mobility”Economic Geography55338–352
12.
ClarkW A VCadwalladerM, 1973, “Locational stress and residential mobility”Environment and Behavior529–41
13.
ClarkW A VOnakaJ C, 1985, “An empirical test of a joint model of residential mobility and housing choice”Environment and Planning A17915–930
14.
DeurlooM CDielemanF MClarkW A V, 1987, “Tenure choice in the Dutch housing market”Environment and Planning A19763–781
15.
DeurlooM CDielemanF MClarkW A V, 1988, “Generalized log—linear models of housing choice”Environment and Planning A2055–69
16.
ElrodTLouviereJ JDaveyK S, 1992, “An empirical comparison of ratings-based and choice-based conjoint models”Journal of Marketing Research29368–377
17.
FischerM MAufhauserE, 1988, “Housing choice in a regulated market: A nested multinomial logit analysis”Geographical Analysis2047–69
18.
GoodmanJ L, 1976, “Housing consumption disequilibrium and local residential mobility”Environment and Planning A8854–875
19.
HanushekE AQuigleyJ M, 1978, “An explicit model of intra-metropolitan mobility”Land Economics54411–429
20.
HourihanK, 1979, “The evaluation of urbàn neighbourhoods 2: Preference”Environment and Planning A111355–1367
21.
HuffJ OClarkW A V, 1978, “Cumulative stress and cumulative inertia: A behavioral model of the decision to move”Environment and Planning A101101–1119
22.
HuffJ OWaldorfB, 1988, “A predictive model of residential mobility and residential segregation”Papers of the Regional Science Association6559–77
23.
JosephA ESmitBMcIlraveyG P, 1989, “Consumer preferences for rural residences: A conjoint analysis in Ontario, Canada”Environment and Planning A2147–63
24.
KnightR LMenchikM D, 1976, “Conjoint preference estimation for residential land use policy evaluation”, in Spatial Choice and Spatial Behavior Eds GolledgeR GRushtonGOhio State University Press, Columbus, OH) pp 135–155
25.
LandaleN SGuestA M, 1985, “Constraints, satisfaction and residential mobility: Speare's model reconsidered”Demography22199–222
26.
LazariA, 1991Designs for Discrete Choice Experiments Including Availability and Attribute Cross Effects PhD thesis, Department of Statistics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY
27.
LazariAAndersonD A, 1991, “Availability and attribute cross effects models: Determinant optimal designs”, technical report, Department of Statistics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY
28.
LindbergEGärlingTMontgomeryH, 1988, “People beliefs and values as determinants of housing preferences and simulated choices”Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research5181–197
29.
LindbergEGärlingTMontgomeryH, 1989, “Belief—value structures as determinants of consumer choice: A study of housing preferences and choices”Journal of Consumer Policy12119–137
30.
LouviereJ J, 1979, “Modeling individual residential preferences: A totally disaggregate approach”Transportation Research A131–15
31.
LouviereJ J, 1984, “Hierarchical information integration: A new method for the design and analysis of complex multiattribute judgment problems”, in Advances in Consumer Researchvolume XI, Ed. KinnearT C (Association for Consumer Research, Provo) pp 148–155
32.
LouviereJ J, 1988Analyzing Decision Making Sage University papers series number 67 (Sage, Newbury Park, CA)
33.
LouviereJ JHenleyD A, 1977, “Information integration theory applied to student apartment selection decisions”Geographical Analysis9130–141
34.
LouviereJ JMeyerR J, 1976, “A model for residential impression formation”Geographical Analysis8479–486
35.
LouviereJ JTimmermansH J P, 1990a, “Hierarchical information integration applied to residential choice behavior”Geographical Analysis22127–144
36.
LouviereJ JTimmermansH J P, 1990b, “Stated preference and choice models applied to recreation research: A review”Leisure Sciences129–32
37.
LouviereJ JTimmermansH J P, 1990c, “Using hierarchical information integration to model consumer responses to possible planning actions: Recreation destination choice illustration”Environment and Planning A22291–308
38.
LouviereJ JWoodworthG G, 1983, “Design and analysis of simulated consumer choice or allocation experiments: An approach based on aggregate data”Journal of Marketing Research20350–367
39.
McFaddenD, 1978, “Modelling the choice of residential location”, paper presented at the special session on destination choice modeling, Transportation Research Board Meetings, Washington, DC, January; copy available from the author
40.
McFaddenDTrainKTyeW B, 1977, “An application of diagnostics tests for the independence from irrelevant alternatives property of the multinomial logit model”Transportation Research Recordnumber 637, 39–46
41.
OnakaJ L, 1983, “A multiple-attribute housing disequilibrium model of residential mobility”Environment and Planning A15751–765
42.
OnakaJ LClarkW A V, 1983, “A disaggregate model of residential mobility and housing choice”Geographical Analysis15287–304
43.
OppewalHTimmermansH J P, 1991, “Context effects and decompositional choice modelling”Papers in Regional Science70113–131
44.
PhippsA G, 1987, “Households' utilities and hedonic prices for inner-city homes”Environment and Planning A1959–80
45.
PhippsA G, 1989a, “Residential stress and consumption disequilibrium in the Saskatoon housing market”Papers of the Regional Science Association6771–87
46.
PhippsA G, 1989b, “Intended mobility responses to possible neighborhood change in an American, a British and a Canadian inner-urban area”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie8043–58
47.
PhippsA GCarterJ E, 1976, “Individual differences in the residential preferences of inner-city homeowners”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie7732–41
48.
PhippsA GCarterJ E, 1984, “An individual-level analysis of the stress—resistance model of household mobility”Geographical Analysis16176–189
49.
PhippsA GCarterJ E, 1985, “Individual differences in the residential preferences of inner-city households”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie7632–42
50.
PhippsA GClarkW A V, 1988, “Interactive recovery and validation of households' residential utility functions”, in Behavioral Modelling in Geography and Planning Eds GolledgeR GTimmermansH J PCroom Helm, London) pp 245–271
PrestonV, 1982, “A multidimensional scaling analysis of individual differences in residential area evaluation”Geografiska Annaler6417–26
53.
QuigleyJ M, 1985, “Consumer choice of dwelling, neighborhood and public services”Regional Science and Urban Economics1541–63
54.
RohrmanBBorcherdingK, 1988, “The cognitive structure of residential decisions”, paper presented at the 24th International Congress of Psychology, Sydney; copy available from the author
55.
TaylorS MElliottSKearnsR, 1989, “The housing experience of chronically mentally disabled clients in Hamilton, Ontario”The Canadian Geographer33146–155
56.
TimmermansH J P, 1984a, “Decompositional multiattribute preference models in spatial choice analysis”Progress in Human Geography8189–221
57.
TimmermansH J P, 1984b, “Decision models for predicting preferences among multiattribute choice alternatives”, in Recent Developments in Spatial Data Analysis Eds BahrenbergGFischerM MNijkampPGower, Aldershot, Hants) pp 337–355
58.
TimmermansH J P, 1989, “Een Decompositional Hierarchisch Model voor Woningkeuze: Theorie en Illustratie”, in Methoden voor Woning-en Woonmilieubehoeften Onderzoek Ed. MusterdSSISWO, Amsterdam) pp 46–72
59.
TimmermansH J PGollegeR G, 1990, “Application of behavioural research on spatial problems II: Preference and choice”Progress in Human Geography311–354
60.
TimmermansH J PBorgersA W Jvan der WaerdenP J H J, 1991, “Mother logit analysis of substitution effects in consumer shopping destination choice”Journal of Business Research23311–323
61.
TimmermansH J PBorgersA W Jvan der WaerdenP J H J, 1992, “Choice experiments versus revealed choice models: A before—after study of consumer spatial shopping behavior”Professional Geographer44406–416
62.
VeldhuisenK JTimmermansH J P, 1984, “Specification of individual residential utility functions”Environment and Planning A161573–1583
63.
WeinbergD HFreidmanJMayoS K, 1981, “Intraurban residential mobility: The role of transactions costs, market imperfections, and household disequilibrium”Journal of Urban Economics9332–348
64.
WhynesD K, 1991, “Mobility and the single homeless”Area23111–118
65.
WolpertJ, 1965, “Behavioral aspects of the decision to migrate”Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association15159–169
