Putting in priors by hand (DCE)
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:02 pm
Hi,
I'm doing a DCE study with 6 attributes, each with 3 levels, and it is clear that each of these attributes will have a positive coefficient in the utility function (i.e., every attribute is something favourable that respondents would want more of). I can put in small positive values like so
and this prevents dominant alternatives. However, I would like to use some extra knowledge that I have i.e., which attributes are most important. For simplicity let's assume the attributes are listed in increasing order of importance to respondents. Is it as simple as modifying the utility function to something like
I'm a bit concerned about the difference in magnitudes for the different attribute levels; is it generally desirable to have similar magnitudes across all the attributes? If so, which (if any) of the following is the better strategy
1) Should I re-scale the coefficients according to the level values e.g. ... b5[1]*att5[1,2,3] + b6[0.06]*att6[50,75,100]+...
2) Should I use coded attribute levels e.g... b2[0.02]*att2[0,1,2] + b3[0.03]*att3[0,1,2]+....
On a related note, if I use very small values [0.01] for my parameter estimates, my S (Sample size) number is huge [5,000] whereas if I use values on the order of [0.1] the size of S becomes much more realistic [50]. Is it a bad idea to assume priors of the order 0.1?
Thank you for any help you can provide & thanks for such a useful forum,
-Larmor
I'm doing a DCE study with 6 attributes, each with 3 levels, and it is clear that each of these attributes will have a positive coefficient in the utility function (i.e., every attribute is something favourable that respondents would want more of). I can put in small positive values like so
- Code: Select all
;alts=package1*,package2*
;rows=12
;eff=(mnl,d)
;model:
U(package1)=b2[0.05]*att2[12,18,24] + b3[0.05]*att3[30,55,80]+ b4[0.05]*att4[1,2,3] + b5[0.05]*att5[1,2,3] + b6[0.05]*att6[50,75,100] + b7[0.05]*att7[1,2,3] /
U(package2)=b2*att2+ b3*att3+ b4*att4+ b5*att5+ b6*att6+ b7*att7 $
and this prevents dominant alternatives. However, I would like to use some extra knowledge that I have i.e., which attributes are most important. For simplicity let's assume the attributes are listed in increasing order of importance to respondents. Is it as simple as modifying the utility function to something like
- Code: Select all
U(package1)=b2[0.02]*att2[12,18,24] + b3[0.03]*att3[30,55,80]+ b4[0.04]*att4[1,2,3] + b5[0.05]*att5[1,2,3] + b6[0.06]*att6[50,75,100] + b7[0.07]*att7[1,2,3] /
U(package2)=b2*att2+ b3*att3+ b4*att4+ b5*att5+ b6*att6+ b7*att7 $
I'm a bit concerned about the difference in magnitudes for the different attribute levels; is it generally desirable to have similar magnitudes across all the attributes? If so, which (if any) of the following is the better strategy
1) Should I re-scale the coefficients according to the level values e.g. ... b5[1]*att5[1,2,3] + b6[0.06]*att6[50,75,100]+...
2) Should I use coded attribute levels e.g... b2[0.02]*att2[0,1,2] + b3[0.03]*att3[0,1,2]+....
On a related note, if I use very small values [0.01] for my parameter estimates, my S (Sample size) number is huge [5,000] whereas if I use values on the order of [0.1] the size of S becomes much more realistic [50]. Is it a bad idea to assume priors of the order 0.1?
Thank you for any help you can provide & thanks for such a useful forum,
-Larmor