Choice prediction

Reproducing the observed choices

{RprobitB} provides a predict() method for RprobitB_fit objects. Per default, the method returns a confusion matrix, which gives an overview of the in-sample prediction performance:

predict(model_train)
#>     predicted
#> true    A    B
#>    A 1030  444
#>    B  450 1005

By setting the argument overview = FALSE, the method instead returns predictions on the level of individual choice occasions:

pred <- predict(model_train, overview = FALSE)
head(pred, n = 10)
#>    deciderID occasionID    A    B true predicted correct
#> 1          1          1 0.91 0.09    A         A    TRUE
#> 2          1          2 0.64 0.36    A         A    TRUE
#> 3          1          3 0.79 0.21    A         A    TRUE
#> 4          1          4 0.18 0.82    B         B    TRUE
#> 5          1          5 0.55 0.45    B         A   FALSE
#> 6          1          6 0.13 0.87    B         B    TRUE
#> 7          1          7 0.54 0.46    B         A   FALSE
#> 8          1          8 0.76 0.24    B         A   FALSE
#> 9          1          9 0.55 0.45    A         A    TRUE
#> 10         1         10 0.59 0.41    A         A    TRUE

Among the three incorrect predictions shown here, the one for decider id = 1 in choice occasion idc = 8 is the most outstanding. Alternative B was chosen although the model predicts a probability of 75% for alternative A. We can use the convenience function get_cov() to extract the characteristics of this particular choice situation:

get_cov(model_train, id = 1, idc = 8)
#>   deciderID occasionID choice  price_A   time_A change_A comfort_A  price_B
#> 8         1          8      B 52.88904 1.916667        0         1 70.51872
#>   time_B change_B comfort_B
#> 8    2.5        0         0

The trip option A was 20€ cheaper and 30 minutes faster, which by our model outweighs the better comfort class for alternative B, recall the estimated effects:

coef(model_train)
#>            Estimate   (sd)
#> 1   price     -1.00 (0.00)
#> 2    time    -25.54 (2.18)
#> 3  change     -4.72 (0.84)
#> 4 comfort    -14.39 (0.91)

The misclassification can be explained by preferences that differ from the average decider (choice behavior heterogeneity), or by unobserved factors that influenced the choice. Indeed, the variance of the error term was estimated high:

point_estimates(model_train)$Sigma
#>          [,1]
#> [1,] 666.3133
#> attr(,"names")
#> [1] "1,1"

Apart from the prediction accuracy, the model performance can be evaluated more nuanced in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The following snippet exemplary shows how to visualize these measures by means of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (Fawcett 2006), using the {plotROC} package (Sachs 2017). The curve is constructed by plotting the true positive fraction against the false positive fraction at various cutoffs (here n.cuts = 20). The closer the curve is to the top-left corner, the better the binary classification.

library(plotROC)
ggplot(data = pred, aes(m = A, d = ifelse(true == "A", 1, 0))) +
  geom_roc(n.cuts = 20, labels = FALSE) +
  style_roc(theme = theme_grey)

Forecasting choice behavior

The predict() method has an additional data argument. Per default, data = NULL, which results into the in-sample case outlined above. Alternatively, data can be either

• an RprobitB_data object (for example the test subsample derived from the train_test() function, see the vignette on choice data),

• or a data frame of custom choice characteristics.

We demonstrate the second case in the following. Assume that a train company wants to anticipate the effect of a price increase on their market share. By our model, increasing the ticket price from 100€ to 110€ (ceteris paribus) draws 15% of the customers to the competitor who does not increase their prices.

predict(
  model_train,
  data = data.frame(
    "price_A" = c(100, 110),
    "price_B" = c(100, 100)
  ),
  overview = FALSE
)
#>   deciderID occasionID    A    B prediction
#> 1         1          1 0.50 0.50          A
#> 2         2          1 0.35 0.65          B

However, offering a better comfort class compensates for the higher price and even results in a gain of 7% market share:

predict(
  model_train,
  data = data.frame(
    "price_A" = c(100, 110),
    "comfort_A" = c(1, 0),
    "price_B" = c(100, 100),
    "comfort_B" = c(1, 1)
  ),
  overview = FALSE
)
#>   deciderID occasionID    A    B prediction
#> 1         1          1 0.50 0.50          A
#> 2         2          1 0.57 0.43          A