看到了却不考虑?选择分析中的意识和考虑

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Choice Modelling Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jocm.2022.100375
Anna Kristina Edenbrandt , Carl-Johan Lagerkvist , Malte Lüken , Jacob L. Orquin
{"title":"看到了却不考虑?选择分析中的意识和考虑","authors":"Anna Kristina Edenbrandt ,&nbsp;Carl-Johan Lagerkvist ,&nbsp;Malte Lüken ,&nbsp;Jacob L. Orquin","doi":"10.1016/j.jocm.2022.100375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Consideration set formation (CSF) is a two-stage decision process in which people first select a subset of products to consider and then evaluate and choose from the selected subset of products. CSF models typically use stated consideration or infer it from choice data probabilistically. This study explores CSF by means of eye-tracking and evaluates how measures of visual consideration compare to stated consideration. We develop a model of CSF behavior, where stated and visual consideration are embedded in the specification of the utility function. We propose three different measures of visual consideration and show that one third of respondents (∼34%) use CSF behavior and that stated consideration diverges substantially from visual consideration. Surprisingly, many product types stated as not considered receive <em>more</em> visual attention, not less. Our findings suggest that stated consideration may be in part a measure of preferences rather than of consideration, implying concerns with endogeneity when including stated consideration data in choice models. Accounting for CSF in discrete choice analysis increases our understanding of the decision process, and can target concerns with biased estimates when analyzing data from two-stage decision processes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46863,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Choice Modelling","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100375"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175553452200032X/pdfft?md5=d0e46aa7f24f406d90fd1066fb2d9f10&pid=1-s2.0-S175553452200032X-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Seen but not considered? Awareness and consideration in choice analysis\",\"authors\":\"Anna Kristina Edenbrandt ,&nbsp;Carl-Johan Lagerkvist ,&nbsp;Malte Lüken ,&nbsp;Jacob L. Orquin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocm.2022.100375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Consideration set formation (CSF) is a two-stage decision process in which people first select a subset of products to consider and then evaluate and choose from the selected subset of products. CSF models typically use stated consideration or infer it from choice data probabilistically. This study explores CSF by means of eye-tracking and evaluates how measures of visual consideration compare to stated consideration. We develop a model of CSF behavior, where stated and visual consideration are embedded in the specification of the utility function. We propose three different measures of visual consideration and show that one third of respondents (∼34%) use CSF behavior and that stated consideration diverges substantially from visual consideration. Surprisingly, many product types stated as not considered receive <em>more</em> visual attention, not less. Our findings suggest that stated consideration may be in part a measure of preferences rather than of consideration, implying concerns with endogeneity when including stated consideration data in choice models. Accounting for CSF in discrete choice analysis increases our understanding of the decision process, and can target concerns with biased estimates when analyzing data from two-stage decision processes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"volume\":\"45 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100375\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175553452200032X/pdfft?md5=d0e46aa7f24f406d90fd1066fb2d9f10&pid=1-s2.0-S175553452200032X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175553452200032X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Choice Modelling","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175553452200032X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

考虑集形成(CSF)是一个两阶段的决策过程,在这个过程中,人们首先选择一个产品子集来考虑,然后从选择的产品子集中进行评估和选择。CSF模型通常使用声明的考虑或从选择数据概率推断。本研究通过眼动追踪来探索脑脊液,并评估视觉考虑与陈述考虑的测量方法。我们开发了CSF行为模型,其中陈述和视觉考虑嵌入到效用函数的规范中。我们提出了三种不同的视觉考虑措施,并表明三分之一的受访者(约34%)使用CSF行为,并且所述的考虑与视觉考虑有很大差异。令人惊讶的是,许多未被考虑的产品类型得到了更多的视觉关注,而不是更少。我们的研究结果表明,陈述性考虑可能在一定程度上是偏好的衡量标准,而不是考虑因素,这意味着在选择模型中包括陈述性考虑数据时,对内生性的关注。在离散选择分析中考虑CSF增加了我们对决策过程的理解,并且在分析两阶段决策过程的数据时可以针对有偏见的估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Seen but not considered? Awareness and consideration in choice analysis

Consideration set formation (CSF) is a two-stage decision process in which people first select a subset of products to consider and then evaluate and choose from the selected subset of products. CSF models typically use stated consideration or infer it from choice data probabilistically. This study explores CSF by means of eye-tracking and evaluates how measures of visual consideration compare to stated consideration. We develop a model of CSF behavior, where stated and visual consideration are embedded in the specification of the utility function. We propose three different measures of visual consideration and show that one third of respondents (∼34%) use CSF behavior and that stated consideration diverges substantially from visual consideration. Surprisingly, many product types stated as not considered receive more visual attention, not less. Our findings suggest that stated consideration may be in part a measure of preferences rather than of consideration, implying concerns with endogeneity when including stated consideration data in choice models. Accounting for CSF in discrete choice analysis increases our understanding of the decision process, and can target concerns with biased estimates when analyzing data from two-stage decision processes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Latent class choice models with an error structure: Investigating potential unobserved associations between latent segmentation and behavior generation Model choice and framing effects: Do discrete choice modeling decisions affect loss aversion estimates? A consistent moment equations for binary probit models with endogenous variables using instrumental variables Transformation-based flexible error structures for choice modeling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1