Visualizing Asymmetric Competition Among More Than 1,000 Products Using Big Search Data

References

• Allenby GM, Rossi PE (1991) Quality perceptions and asymmetric switching between brands. Marketing Sci. 10(3):185–204.Link, Google Scholar
• Aurier P, Jean S, Zaichkowsky JL (2000) Consideration set size and familiarity with usage context. Adv. Consumer Res. 27(1):307–313.Google Scholar
• Baye MR, Morgan J, Scholten P (2004) Price dispersion in the small and in the large: Evidence from an Internet price comparison site. J. Indust. Econom. 52(4):463–496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baye MR, Gatti JRJ, Kattuman P, Morgan J (2009) Clicks, discontinuities, and firm demand online. J. Econom. Management Strategy 18(4):935–975.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bergen M, Peteraf MA (2002) Competitor identification and competitor analysis: A broad-based managerial approach. Managerial Decision Econom. 23(4–5):157–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blondel VD, Guillaume J-L, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Statist. Mechanics: Theory Experiment 2008(10):1742–1756.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boldi P, Vigna S (2014) Axioms for centrality. Internet Math. 10(3–4):222–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Buja A, Swayne DF, Littman ML, Dean N, Hofmann H, Chen L (2008) Data visualization with multidimensional scaling. J. Comput. Graphical Statist. 17(2):444–472.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark WC, Carroll JD, Yang JC, Janal MN (1986) Multidimensional scaling reveals two dimensions of thermal pain. J. Experiment. Psych.: Human Perception Performance 12(1):103–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Nooy W, Mrvar A, Batagelj V (2011) Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeSarbo W, Jedidi K (1995) The spatial representation of heterogeneous consideration sets. Marketing Sci. 14(3):326–342.Link, Google Scholar
• DeSarbo WS, Grewal R (2007) An alternative efficient representation of demand-based competitive asymmetry. Strategic Management J. 28(7):755–766.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeSarbo WS, Grewal R, Wind J (2006) Who competes with whom? A demand-based perspective for identifying and representing asymmetric competition. Strategic Management J. 27(2):101–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeSarbo WS, Manrai AK, Manrai LA (1993) Non-spatial tree models for the assessment of comparative market structure: An integrated review of the marketing and psychometric literature. Eliashberg J, Lilien G, eds. Marketing, Handbook Oper. Res. Management Sci. (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 193–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diaconis P, Goel S, Holmes S (2008) Horseshoes in multidimensional scaling and local kernel methods. Ann. Appl. Statist. 2(3):777–807.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erdem T (1996) A dynamic analysis of market structure based on panel data. Marketing Sci. 15(4):359–378.Link, Google Scholar
• Error B, Error C (2004) Efficient click-stream data collection. US Patent US 20040098229 A1 (File date, June 26, 2003).Google Scholar
• Faure C, Natter M (2010) New metrics for evaluating preference maps. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 27(3):261–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fortunato S (2010) Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports 486(3):75–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fortunato S, Barthelemy M (2007) Resolution limit in community detection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104(1):36–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• France S, Ghose S (2016) An analysis and visualization methodology for identifying and testing market structure. Marketing Sci. 35(1):182–197.Link, Google Scholar
• Fruchterman TMJ, Reingold EM (1991) Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Software: Practice Experience 21(11):1129–1164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gagnon P, Torii H (2012) NPD display search quarterly global TV shipment and forecast report. NPD Display Search, Englewood, CO.Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Yao Y (2011) Using transaction prices to re-examine price dispersion in electronic markets. Inform. Systems Res. 22(2):269–288.Link, Google Scholar
• Giaglis GM, Klein S, O’Keefe RM (2002) The role of intermediaries in electronic marketplaces: Developing a contingency model. Inform. Systems J. 12(3):231–246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girvan M, Newman ME (2002) Community structure in social and biological networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99(12):7821–7826.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haynes M, Thompson S (2008) Price, price dispersion and number of sellers at a low entry cost shopbot. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 26(2):459–472.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinz O, Skiera B, Barrot C, Becker JU (2011) Seeding strategies for viral marketing: An empirical comparison. J. Marketing 75(6):55–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kamada T, Kawai S (1989) An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Inform. Processing Lett. 31(1):7–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kamakura WA, Russell GJ (1989) A probabilistic choice model for market segmentation and elasticity structure. J. Marketing Res. 26(4):379–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kendall M, Cockel R, Becker J, Hawkins C (1970) Raised serum alkaline phosphatase in rheumatoid disease. An index of liver dysfunction? Ann. Rheumatic Diseases 29(5):537–540.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim JB, Albuquerque P, Bronnenberg BJ (2010) Online demand under limited consumer search. Marketing Sci. 29(6):1001–1023.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim JB, Albuquerque P, Bronnenberg BJ (2011) Mapping online consumer search. J. Marketing Res. 48(1):13–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lancichinetti A, Fortunato S (2009) Community detection algorithms: A comparative analysis. Physical Rev. E 80(5):056117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lattin JM, Carrol DJ, Green PE (2003) Analyzing Multivariate Data (Duxbury Resource Center, Pacific Grove, CA).Google Scholar
• Lee TY, Bradlow ET (2011) Automated marketing research using online customer reviews. J. Marketing Res. 48(5):881–894.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lilien GL, Rangaswamy A (2004) Marketing Engineering: Computer-Assisted Marketing Analysis and Planning (DecisionPro, Victoria, BC, Canada).Google Scholar
• Marbeau Y (1998) Communication of research results. The ESOMAR Handbook of Market and Opinion Research (ESOMAR, Amsterdam), 519–552.Google Scholar
• Meunier D, Lambiotte R, Fornito A, Ersche KD, Bullmore ET (2009) Hierarchical modularity in human brain functional networks. Frontiers Neuroinformatics 3(37):1–12.Google Scholar
• Moe WW (2006) An empirical two-stage choice model with varying decision rules applied to Internet clickstream data. J. Marketing Res. 43(4):680–692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Netzer O, Feldman R, Goldenberg J, Fresko M (2012) Mine your own business: Market-structure surveillance through text mining. Marketing Sci. 31(3):521–543.Link, Google Scholar
• Newman ME (2004) Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks. Physical Rev. E 69(6):066133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newman ME, Girvan M (2004) Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Rev. E 69(2):026113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newman JW, Lockeman BD (1975) Measuring prepurchase information seeking. J. Consumer Res. 2(3):216–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Onnela JP, Chakraborti A, Kaski K, Kertész J, Kanto A (2003) Dynamics of market correlations: Taxonomy and portfolio analysis. Physical Rev. E 68(5):056110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ozimec A-M, Natter M, Reutterer T (2010) Geographical information systems-based marketing decisions: Effects of alternative visualizations on decision quality. J. Marketing 74(6):94–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Palla G, Derényi I, Farkas I, Vicsek T (2005) Uncovering the overlapping community structure of complex networks in nature and society. Nature 435(7043):814–818.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paulssen M, Bagozzi RP (2006) Goal hierarchies as antecedents of market structure. Psych. Marketing 23(8):689–709.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peter JP, Olson JC (1993) Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy, 3rd ed. (Irwin, Homewood, IL).Google Scholar
• Ramaswamy V, DeSarbo WS (1990) Sculptre: A new methodology for deriving and analyzing hierarchical product-market structures from panel data. J. Marketing Res. 27(4):418–427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rao VR, Sabavala DJ (1986) Measurement and Use of Market Response Functions for Allocating Marketing Resources (Marketing Science Institute, Boston).Google Scholar
• Rappuoli R, Aderem A (2011) A 2020 vision for vaccines against HIV, tuberculosis and malaria. Nature 473(7348):463–469.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts JH, Lattin JM (1991) Development and testing of a model of consideration set composition. J. Marketing Res. 28(4):429–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rotta R, Noack A (2011) Multilevel local search algorithms for modularity clustering. J. Experiment. Algorithmics 16:2–3.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shocker AD, Ben-Akiva M, Boccara B, Nedungadi P (1991) Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice: Issues, models, and suggestions. Marketing Lett. 2(3):181–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sipior JC, Ward BT, Mendoza RA (2011) Online privacy concerns associated with cookies, flash cookies, and Web beacons. J. Internet Commerce 10(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smelcer JB, Carmel E (1997) The effectiveness of different representations for managerial problem solving: Comparing tables and maps. Decision Sci. 28(2):391–420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith MD, Brynjolfsson E (2001) Consumer decision-making at an Internet shopbot: Brand still matters. J. Indust. Econom. 49(4):541–558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swait J, Erdem T (2007) Brand effects on choice and choice set formation under uncertainty. Marketing Sci. 26(5):679–697.Link, Google Scholar
• Tirunillai S, Tellis G (2014) Mining marketing meaning from chatter: Strategic brand analysis of big data using latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Marketing Res. 51(4):463–479.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Urban G, Johnson PL, Hauser JR (1984) Testing competitive market structures. Marketing Sci. 3(2):83–112.Link, Google Scholar
• Urban GL, Hulland JS, Weinberg BD (1993) Premarket forecasting for new consumer durable goods: Modeling categorization, elimination, and consideration phenomena. J. Marketing 57(2):47–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2007) VOS: A New Method for Visualizing Similarities Between Objects (Springer, Berlin).Google Scholar
• van Eck NJ, Waltman L, Dekker R, van den Berg J (2010) A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 61(12):2405–2416.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vera JF, Macías R, Heiser WJ (2009) A dual latent class unfolding model for two-way two-mode preference rating data. Comput. Statist. Data Anal. 53(8):3231–3244.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yao W-M, Fahmy S (2014) Flow-based partitioning of network testbed experiments. Comput. Networks 58:141–157.Crossref, Google Scholar