IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/revmkt/v8y2010i2p1-21n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing Causal Effects with Observational Studies for Evidence-based Marketing at IBM

Author

Listed:
  • Manganaris Stefanos

    (IBM, stefanos@us.ibm.com)

  • Bhasin Ruchi

    (Marketics Technologies Ltd, a WNS Company, ruchi.bhasin@gmail.com)

  • Reid Michael

    (IBM, msreid@us.ibm.com)

  • Hermiz Keith B

    (IBM, khermiz@us.ibm.com)

Abstract

Sound marketing decisions often require understanding the cause-and-effect relationships between treatment and outcomes. Market research traditionally approaches such questions by designing randomized experiments that aim to isolate the effects of the specific treatment from other effects. We review an alternate methodology that is well suited to observational studies, where the analyst cannot control how treatment is applied. The methodology uses propensity scoring and matching to emulate the randomization of treatment. It is well established in other fields, but not widely known among marketers in spite of the fact that non-experimental data is common in marketing studies. We present two applications as case studies to illustrate the value of the methodology and to describe how we addressed some of the practical issues, in sufficient detail for readers to be able to use the methodology in similar studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Manganaris Stefanos & Bhasin Ruchi & Reid Michael & Hermiz Keith B, 2010. "Analyzing Causal Effects with Observational Studies for Evidence-based Marketing at IBM," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 1-21, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:revmkt:v:8:y:2010:i:2:p:1-21:n:2
    DOI: 10.2202/1546-5616.1116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1546-5616.1116
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1546-5616.1116?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. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    2. Quinn McNemar, 1947. "Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 12(2), pages 153-157, June.
    3. Joseph O. Eastlack, Jr. & Ambar G. Rao, 1989. "Advertising Experiments at the Campbell Soup Company," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 57-71.
    4. Eric T. Anderson & Duncan I. Simester, 2004. "Long-Run Effects of Promotion Depth on New Versus Established Customers: Three Field Studies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 4-20, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Oliver J. Rutz & George F. Watson, 2019. "Endogeneity and marketing strategy research: an overview," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 479-498, May.
    2. Kurt P. Munz & Minah H. Jung & Adam L. Alter, 2020. "Name Similarity Encourages Generosity: A Field Experiment in Email Personalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(6), pages 1071-1091, November.
    3. Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis & Robert Slonim, 2011. "Rewarding Altruism? A Natural Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 17636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Ginger Zhe Jin & Andrew Kato & John A. List, 2010. "That’S News To Me! Information Revelation In Professional Certification Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 104-122, January.
    5. Deng, Weiguang & Li, Dayang & Zhou, Dong, 2019. "Beauty and Job Accessibility: New Evidence from a Field Experiment," GLO Discussion Paper Series 369, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    6. Bosch-Domènech, Antoni & Vriend, Nicolaas J., 2013. "On the role of non-equilibrium focal points as coordination devices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 52-67.
    7. Mujcic, Redzo & Frijters, Paul, 2013. "Still Not Allowed on the Bus: It Matters If You're Black or White!," IZA Discussion Papers 7300, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Cardenas, Juan Camilo & Rodriguez, Luz Angela & Johnson, Nancy, 2011. "Collective action for watershed management: field experiments in Colombia and Kenya," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 275-303, June.
    9. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    10. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Aaron K. Chatterji & Michael Findley & Nathan M. Jensen & Stephan Meier & Daniel Nielson, 2016. "Field experiments in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 116-132, January.
    11. Navdeep Sahni, 2015. "Effect of temporal spacing between advertising exposures: Evidence from online field experiments," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 203-247, September.
    12. Rommel, Jens & Anggraini, Eva, 2018. "Spatially explicit framed field experiments on ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 201-205.
    13. Uttam Bandyopadhyay & Atanu Biswas & Shirsendu Mukherjee, 2009. "Adaptive two-treatment two-period crossover design for binary treatment responses incorporating carry-over effects," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 18(1), pages 13-33, March.
    14. Kyriaki Remoundou & Drichoutis Andreas & Phoebe Koundouri, 2010. "Warm glow in charitable auctions: Are the WEIRDos driving the results?," DEOS Working Papers 1028, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    15. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    16. Johannes Abeler & Felix Marklein, 2017. "Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 99-127.
    17. Uncles, Mark D. & East, Robert & Lomax, Wendy, 2013. "Good customers: The value of customers by mode of acquisition," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 119-125.
    18. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    19. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    20. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.

    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:bpj:revmkt:v:8:y:2010:i:2:p:1-21:n:2. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.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.