An Integrated Choice Model Incorporating Alternative Mechanisms for Consumers’ Reactions to In-Store Display and Feature Advertising

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1050.0170

References

  • Ailawadi Kusum L., Gedenk Karen, Neslin Scott A. Heterogeneity and purchase event feedback in choice models: An empirical analysis with implications for model building. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (1999) 16:177–198CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Allenby Greg M., Ginter James L. The effects of in-store display and feature advertising on consideration sets. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (1995) 12:67–80CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Andrews Rick L., Srinivasan T. C. Studying consideration effects in empirical choice models using scanner panel data. J. Marketing Res. (1995) 32(1):30–41CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bronnenberg Bart J., Vanhonacker Wilfried R. Limited choice sets, local price response, and implied measures of price competition. J. Marketing Res. (1996) 33(May):163–173CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chintagunta Pradeep K. Estimating a multinomial probit model of brand choice using the method of simulated moments. Marketing Sci. (1992) 11(4):386–407LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Fader Peter S., McAlister Leigh. An elimination by aspects model of consumer response to promotion calibrated on UPC scanner data. J. Marketing Res. (1990) 27(August):322–332CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gilbride Timothy, Allenby Greg M. A choice model with conjunctive, disjunctive, and compensatory screening rules. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3):391–406LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Grover Rajiv, Srinivasan V. Evaluating the multiple effects of retail promotions on brand loyal and brand switching segment. J. Marketing Res. (1992) 29(February):76–89CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gupta Sunil. Impact of sales promotions on when, what, and how much to buy. J. Marketing Res. (1988) 25(November):342–355CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hauser John R., Wernerfelt Birger. An evaluation cost model of consideration sets. J. Consumer Res. (1990) 16(March):393–408CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Inman Jeffrey J., McAlister Leigh, Hoyer Wayne D. Promotion signal: Proxy for a price cut? J. Consumer Res. (1990) 17(June):74–81CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Johnson Eric J., Meyer Robert J. Compensatory choice models of noncompensatory processes: The effect of varying context. J. Consumer Res. (1984) 11(June):528–541CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Johnson Eric J., Meyer Robert J., Ghose Sanjoy. When choice models fails: Compensatory models in negatively correlated environments. J. Marketing Res. (1989) 24(August):255–270CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kamakura Wagner A., Russell Gary J. A probabilistic choice model for market segmentation and elasticity structure. J. Marketing Res. (1989) 26(November):379–390CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Leclerc France, Hsee Christopher K., Nunes Joseph C. Narrow focusing: Why the relative position of a good in its category matters more than it should. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(2):194–205LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Lemon Katherien N., Nowlis Stephen M. Developing synergies between promotions and brands in different price-quality tiers. J. Marketing Res. (2002) 39(May):379–390Google Scholar
  • Lussier Denis A., Olshavsky Richard W. Task complexity and contingent processing in brand choice. J. Consumer Res. (1979) 6(September):154–165CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mehta Nitin, Rajiv Surendra, Srinivasan Kannan. Price uncertainty and consumer search: A structural model of consideration set formation. Marketing Sci. (2003) 22(1):58–84LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Papatla Purushottam. A multiplicative fixed-effects model of consumer choice. Marketing Sci. (1996) 15(3):243–261LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Papatla Purushottam, Krishnamurthi Lakshman. Measuring the dynamic effects of promotions on brand choice. J. Marketing Res. (1996) 33(February):20–35CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Payne John L. Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organ. Behav. Human Performance (1976) 16(August):366–387CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Roberts John H., Lattin James M. Development and testing of a model of consideration set composition. J. Marketing Res. (1991) 28(November):429–441CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schwartz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann. Statist. (1978) 6:461–464CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Siddarth S., Bucklin Randolph E., Morrison Donald G. Making the cut: Modeling and analyzing choice set restriction in scanner panel data. J. Marketing Res. (1995) 32(August):255–266CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • van Heerde Harald J., Leeflang Peter S. H., Wittink Dick R. Semiparametric analysis to estimate the deal effect curve. J. Marketing Res. (2001) 38(May):197–215CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • van Heerde Harald J., Leeflang Peter S. H., Wittink Dick R. Decomposing the sales promotion bump with store data. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3):317–334LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Zhang Jie, Krishnamurthi Lakshman. Customizing promotions in online stores. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(4):561–578LinkGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.