Ortunities and choices of others. Our models are related to other models of social influence that have also been developed for the study of interdependent behavior and social dynamics, including social interactions models for the study of the effects of group or neighborhood membership (Brock and Durlauf 2001) and dynamic models of social networks and group formation (Steglich, Snijders, and Pearson 2010). Our models focus on group (neighborhood) choice by individuals and the aggregate implications of individual choices. In Section 2 we describe two types of data available to estimate models of NSC309132 chemical information residential choice: stated preferences data, based on vignettes, and actual move data, based on mobility histories. In Section 3 we introduce the general discrete choice model for residential choice. In Sections 4 and 5, we detail a range of practical GGTI298MedChemExpress GGTI298 issues that come up when estimating choice models from residential mobility data, including the selection of an appropriate functional form for linking neighborhood characteristics to individual choices, specifying the appropriate geographic units chosen (e.g., neighborhoods, regions of metro areas, housing units), the independence from irrelevant alternatives assumption, and techniques for exploring how people may evaluate their current place of residence differently from other destinations. In Section 6 we discuss how to incorporate the effect of housing costs (prices) into models of residential choice. Section 7 provides empirical examples of some of theNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptSociol Methodol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 08.Bruch and MarePagemethods discussed in the paper. Section 8 discusses methods for making the link between the residential choices of individuals and aggregate neighborhood change, including agentbased models, interactive Markov models, and general equilibrium models. Section 9 concludes the paper with a brief discussion of future research on methods for the study of residential choice and mobility.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript2. TYPES OF DATAMost studies of residential choice are based on either stated residential preferences or observations of actual residential moves. Stated residential preference data are typically obtained through individuals’ interview responses and measure their evaluation of or willingness to move into hypothetical neighborhoods that vary along one or more neighborhood characteristics. Actual move data, obtained through residential histories, are reports of the location decisions made by individuals. They reflect both individuals’ preferences about where to live and the constraints they face in making residential decisions. Both types of data can be analyzed within a common framework of choice. Stated Preferences An example of stated preference data are measures of residential race-ethnic preferences from the 1992?994 Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality (MCSUI) (Bobo et al. 2000, Appendix D). The MCSUI presented survey respondents with cards depicting five neighborhoods vignettes of 14 houses that vary in their race-ethnic composition. The respondent’s house is located in the center of the neighborhood. Although the study as a whole examined four groups (whites, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics), each card shows only two groups, the respondent’s group and one other group. Figure 1 shows the cards shown to black respondents concerning white nei.Ortunities and choices of others. Our models are related to other models of social influence that have also been developed for the study of interdependent behavior and social dynamics, including social interactions models for the study of the effects of group or neighborhood membership (Brock and Durlauf 2001) and dynamic models of social networks and group formation (Steglich, Snijders, and Pearson 2010). Our models focus on group (neighborhood) choice by individuals and the aggregate implications of individual choices. In Section 2 we describe two types of data available to estimate models of residential choice: stated preferences data, based on vignettes, and actual move data, based on mobility histories. In Section 3 we introduce the general discrete choice model for residential choice. In Sections 4 and 5, we detail a range of practical issues that come up when estimating choice models from residential mobility data, including the selection of an appropriate functional form for linking neighborhood characteristics to individual choices, specifying the appropriate geographic units chosen (e.g., neighborhoods, regions of metro areas, housing units), the independence from irrelevant alternatives assumption, and techniques for exploring how people may evaluate their current place of residence differently from other destinations. In Section 6 we discuss how to incorporate the effect of housing costs (prices) into models of residential choice. Section 7 provides empirical examples of some of theNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptSociol Methodol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 March 08.Bruch and MarePagemethods discussed in the paper. Section 8 discusses methods for making the link between the residential choices of individuals and aggregate neighborhood change, including agentbased models, interactive Markov models, and general equilibrium models. Section 9 concludes the paper with a brief discussion of future research on methods for the study of residential choice and mobility.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript2. TYPES OF DATAMost studies of residential choice are based on either stated residential preferences or observations of actual residential moves. Stated residential preference data are typically obtained through individuals’ interview responses and measure their evaluation of or willingness to move into hypothetical neighborhoods that vary along one or more neighborhood characteristics. Actual move data, obtained through residential histories, are reports of the location decisions made by individuals. They reflect both individuals’ preferences about where to live and the constraints they face in making residential decisions. Both types of data can be analyzed within a common framework of choice. Stated Preferences An example of stated preference data are measures of residential race-ethnic preferences from the 1992?994 Multi-City Study of Urban Inequality (MCSUI) (Bobo et al. 2000, Appendix D). The MCSUI presented survey respondents with cards depicting five neighborhoods vignettes of 14 houses that vary in their race-ethnic composition. The respondent’s house is located in the center of the neighborhood. Although the study as a whole examined four groups (whites, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics), each card shows only two groups, the respondent’s group and one other group. Figure 1 shows the cards shown to black respondents concerning white nei.
M2 ion-channel m2ion-channel.com
Just another WordPress site