Specification of regret-based models of choice behaviour: formal analyses and experimental design based evidence—commentary

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
36 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

A recent paper published in this journal compares two regret based choice models, and concludes that one of them is theoretically inferior and has a worse empirical performance in the context of a particular data set [Rasouli and Timmermans, Transportation 6:1–22, 2016]. Unfortunately, those conclusions are ill-founded as they are based on a misinterpretation and misrepresentation of one of the two considered models. Furthermore, the paper overlooks highly relevant recent work on the topic, and contains insufficient empirical analyses. Together, these issues make that the paper provides a confusing addition to the literature. With the aim of lifting some of this confusion, this commentary sets out to highlight, and correct where possible, the paper’s shortcomings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-10
Number of pages10
JournalTransportation
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Keywords

  • Commentary
  • Discrete choice theory
  • Random regret minimization
  • Regret
  • RRM

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Specification of regret-based models of choice behaviour: formal analyses and experimental design based evidence—commentary'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this