Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/qmktec/v3y2005i2p175-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generalized Reverse Discrete Choice Models

Author

Listed:
  • Sanjog Misra
Abstract
Marketing practitioners and academics have shown a keen interest in the processes that drive consumers’ choices since the early work of Guadagni and Little (1982). Over the past decade or so, a number of alternative models have been proposed, implemented and analyzed. The common behavioral assumption that underlines these models of discrete choice is random utility maximization (RUM). The RUM assumption, in its simplest form, posits that a consumer with a finite set of brands to choose from chooses the brand that gives her the maximum amount of utility. An alternative approach would be to assume that consumers choose the alternative that offers them the least disutility. Our paper proposes and tests a broad class of generalized extreme value models based on this hypothesis. We model the decision process of the consumer the assumption random disutility minimization (RDM) and derive a new class of discrete choice models based on this assumption. Our findings reveal that there are significant theoretical and econometric differences between the discrete choice models derived from a RUM framework and the RDM framework proposed in this paper. On the theoretical front we find that the class of discrete choice models based on the assumption of disutility minimization is structurally different from the models in the literature. Further, the models in this class are available in closed form and exhibit the same flexibility as the GEV models proposed by McFadden (1978). In fact, the number of parameters are identical to and have the same interpretation as those obtained via RUM based GEV models. In addition to the theoretical differences we also uncover significant empirical insights. With the computing effort and time for both models being roughly the same this new set of models offers marketing academics and researchers a viable new tool with which to investigate discrete choice behavior. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjog Misra, 2005. "Generalized Reverse Discrete Choice Models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 175-200, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:qmktec:v:3:y:2005:i:2:p:175-200
    DOI: 10.1007/s11129-005-0260-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11129-005-0260-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11129-005-0260-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter M. Guadagni & John D. C. Little, 1983. "A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 203-238.
    2. Peter E. Rossi & Robert E. McCulloch & Greg M. Allenby, 1996. "The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 321-340.
    3. Joskow, Paul L & Mishkin, Frederic S, 1977. "Electric Utility Fuel Choice Behavior in the United States," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(3), pages 719-736, October.
    4. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    5. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Competitive Pricing Behavior in the Auto Market: A Structural Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 42-60, January.
    6. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    7. Teck-Hua Ho & Christopher S. Tang & David R. Bell, 1998. "Rational Shopping Behavior and the Option Value of Variable Pricing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 145-160, December.
    8. Koppelman, Frank S. & Wen, Chieh-Hua, 2000. "The paired combinatorial logit model: properties, estimation and application," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 75-89, February.
    9. Vrinda Kadiyali & Pradeep Chintagunta & Naufel Vilcassim, 2000. "Manufacturer-Retailer Channel Interactions and Implications for Channel Power: An Empirical Investigation of Pricing in a Local Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 127-148, September.
    10. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    11. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre, 1999. "Reverse discrete choice models," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 745-764, November.
    12. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    13. Jain, Dipak C & Vilcassim, Naufel J & Chintagunta, Pradeep K, 1994. "A Random-Coefficients Logit Brand-Choice Model Applied to Panel Data," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(3), pages 317-328, July.
    14. McCulloch, Robert & Rossi, Peter E., 1994. "An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-2), pages 207-240.
    15. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Competitive Pricing Behavior in the US Auto Market: A Structural Analysis," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm228, Yale School of Management.
    16. Swait, Joffre, 2003. "Flexible Covariance Structures for Categorical Dependent Variables through Finite Mixtures of Generalized Extreme Value Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 80-87, January.
    17. Dan Horsky & Paul Nelson, 1992. "New Brand Positioning and Pricing in an Oligopolistic Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 133-153.
    18. P. K. Kannan & Gordon P. Wright, 1991. "Modeling and Testing Structured Markets: A Nested Logit Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 58-82.
    19. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Koppelman, Frank S., 2001. "The generalized nested logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 627-641, August.
    20. Bhat, Chandra R., 2003. "Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 837-855, November.
    21. Small, Kenneth A., 1994. "Approximate generalized extreme value models of discrete choice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 351-382, June.
    22. Winer, Russell S, 1986. "A Reference Price Model of Brand Choice for Frequently Purchased Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(2), pages 250-256, September.
    23. Jeffrey A. Dubin, 1986. "A Nested Logit Model of Space and Water Heat System Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 112-124.
    24. Jill E. Hobbs, 1997. "Measuring the Importance of Transaction Costs in Cattle Marketing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1083-1095.
    25. Füsun Gönül & Kannan Srinivasan, 1996. "Estimating the Impact of Consumer Expectations of Coupons on Purchase Behavior: A Dynamic Structural Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 262-279.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Nevskij, Sergei, 2013. ""British disease": the factors of the economic crisis in the UK in 1970," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, pages 38-61, February.
    3. Wadud, Zia & Mattioli, Giulio, 2021. "Fully automated vehicles: A cost-based analysis of the share of ownership and mobility services, and its socio-economic determinants," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 228-244.
    4. Kumar, Anshuman Anjani & Kang, Jee Eun & Kwon, Changhyun & Nikolaev, Alexander, 2016. "Inferring origin-destination pairs and utility-based travel preferences of shared mobility system users in a multi-modal environment," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 270-291.
    5. Ariel Guerreiro & Joao Amaro de Matos, 2013. "Referenda outcomes and the influence of polls: a social network feedback process," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp578, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pradeep Chintagunta & Tülin Erdem & Peter E. Rossi & Michel Wedel, 2006. "Structural Modeling in Marketing: Review and Assessment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 604-616, 11-12.
    2. Baltas, George & Doyle, Peter, 2001. "Random utility models in marketing research: a survey," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 115-125, February.
    3. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    4. Andrew Ching & Susumu Imai & Masakazu Ishihara & Neelam Jain, 2012. "A practitioner’s guide to Bayesian estimation of discrete choice dynamic programming models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 151-196, June.
    5. V Kumar & Amalesh Sharma & Shaphali Gupta, 2017. "Accessing the influence of strategic marketing research on generating impact: moderating roles of models, journals, and estimation approaches," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 164-185, March.
    6. Sudhir Voleti & Praveen K. Kopalle & Pulak Ghosh, 2015. "An Interproduct Competition Model Incorporating Branding Hierarchy and Product Similarities Using Store-Level Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2720-2738, November.
    7. Jorge Silva-Risso & Irina Ionova, 2008. "—A Nested Logit Model of Product and Transaction-Type Choice for Planning Automakers' Pricing and Promotions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 545-566, 07-08.
    8. Chintagunta, Pradeep & Kyriazidou, Ekaterini & Perktold, Josef, 2001. "Panel data analysis of household brand choices," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1-2), pages 111-153, July.
    9. David R. Bell & Jeongwen Chiang & V. Padmanabhan, 1999. "The Decomposition of Promotional Response: An Empirical Generalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 504-526.
    10. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Structural Analysis of Manufacturer Pricing in the Presence of a Strategic Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 244-264, October.
    11. Abhik Roy & Jagmohan Raju, 2011. "The influence of demand factors on dynamic competitive pricing strategy: An empirical study," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 259-281, September.
    12. Bradlow, Eric T. & Gangwar, Manish & Kopalle, Praveen & Voleti, Sudhir, 2017. "The Role of Big Data and Predictive Analytics in Retailing," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 79-95.
    13. Laura Grigolon & Frank Verboven, 2014. "Nested Logit or Random Coefficients Logit? A Comparison of Alternative Discrete Choice Models of Product Differentiation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 916-935, December.
    14. Agarwal, Manoj K. & Ma, Zecong & Park, Chang Hee & Zheng, Yilong, 2022. "The impact of a manufacturer’s financial liquidity on its market strategies and pricing and promotion decisions in retail grocery markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 844-857.
    15. Hongmin Li & Woonghee Tim Huh, 2011. "Pricing Multiple Products with the Multinomial Logit and Nested Logit Models: Concavity and Implications," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 549-563, October.
    16. Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2001. "Endogeneity and Heterogeneity in a Probit Demand Model: Estimation Using Aggregate Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 442-456, December.
    17. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    18. Nishtha Langer & Chris Forman & Sunder Kekre & Baohong Sun, 2012. "Ushering Buyers into Electronic Channels: An Empirical Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1212-1231, December.
    19. Richard Paap & Philip Hans Franses, 2000. "A dynamic multinomial probit model for brand choice with different long-run and short-run effects of marketing-mix variables," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 717-744.
    20. Jean-Pierre Dubé, 2004. "Multiple Discreteness and Product Differentiation: Demand for Carbonated Soft Drinks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 66-81, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:qmktec:v:3:y:2005:i:2:p:175-200. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.