
doi: 10.3982/ecta17448 , 10.47004/wp.cem.2020.4720 , 10.1920/wp.cem.2019.3719 , 10.48550/arxiv.1907.02337
arXiv: 1907.02337
handle: 10419/241922 , 10419/211130
doi: 10.3982/ecta17448 , 10.47004/wp.cem.2020.4720 , 10.1920/wp.cem.2019.3719 , 10.48550/arxiv.1907.02337
arXiv: 1907.02337
handle: 10419/241922 , 10419/211130
We propose a robust method of discrete choice analysis when agents' choice sets are unobserved. Our core model assumes nothing about agents' choice sets apart from their minimum size. Importantly, it leaves unrestricted the dependence, conditional on observables, between choice sets and preferences. We first characterize the sharp identification region of the model's parameters by a finite set of conditional moment inequalities. We then apply our theoretical findings to learn about households' risk preferences and choice sets from data on their deductible choices in auto collision insurance. We find that the data can be explained by expected utility theory with low levels of risk aversion and heterogeneous non‐singleton choice sets, and that more than three in four households require limited choice sets to explain their deductible choices. We also provide simulation evidence on the computational tractability of our method in applications with larger feasible sets or higher‐dimensional unobserved heterogeneity.
ddc:330, discrete choice, unobserved heterogeneity, choice sets, Econometrics (econ.EM), Decision theory, Individual preferences, risk preferences, partial identification, FOS: Economics and business, random utility, Actuarial mathematics, Economics - Econometrics
ddc:330, discrete choice, unobserved heterogeneity, choice sets, Econometrics (econ.EM), Decision theory, Individual preferences, risk preferences, partial identification, FOS: Economics and business, random utility, Actuarial mathematics, Economics - Econometrics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 24 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
