IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aumajo/v18y2010i2p105-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Correcting the illogicality in probability data of mutually exclusive behaviours

Author

Listed:
  • Parackal, Mathew

Abstract

One application of the Verbal Probability Scale (VPS) that has immense value to marketers is its use in estimating market shares and customer preferences of mutually exclusive offerings. The literature on this application reveals illogicality in the data produced with the scale. Researchers have corrected the illogicality by employing a weighting technique. This technique enables the logical interpretation of data, albeit with certain ramification on the estimates. The current study investigated the extent to which the ramification affected the estimates. Comparisons were made between the weighted means produced on VPS with the means produced on a Constant Sum Scale (CSS), a scale that controls for illogical assignment of scores. The results showed that the weighted means were comparable to that produced on CSS for a set of mutually exclusive mobile phone payment plans. The paper discusses the implications of the results and future research needed for developing this particular application.

Suggested Citation

  • Parackal, Mathew, 2010. "Correcting the illogicality in probability data of mutually exclusive behaviours," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 105-111.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aumajo:v:18:y:2010:i:2:p:105-111
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ausmj.2009.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441358209001050
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ausmj.2009.12.001?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. F. Thomas Juster, 1966. "Consumer Buying Intentions and Purchase Probability: An Experiment in Survey Design," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number just66-2.
    2. Thomas S. Wallsten & David V. Budescu & Rami Zwick, 1993. "Comparing the Calibration and Coherence of Numerical and Verbal Probability Judgments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 176-190, February.
    3. Budescu, David V. & Wallsten, Thomas S., 1985. "Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrases," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 391-405, December.
    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. Piercey, M. David, 2009. "Motivated reasoning and verbal vs. numerical probability assessment: Evidence from an accounting context," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 330-341, March.
    2. Adam Harris & Adam Corner & Juemin Xu & Xiufang Du, 2013. "Lost in translation? Interpretations of the probability phrases used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in China and the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 415-425, November.
    3. Zimmer, Anja & Schade, Christian & Gründl, Helmut, 2009. "Is default risk acceptable when purchasing insurance? Experimental evidence for different probability representations, reasons for default, and framings," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 11-23, February.
    4. Ece Tuncel & William P. Bottom, 2019. "The Differential Effects of Fear and Tranquility on Risk Taking When Probabilistic Information is Communicated in Verbal Terms," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 671-693, August.
    5. Cristine D. Delnevo & Michelle Jeong & Ollie Ganz & Daniel P. Giovenco & Erin Miller Lo, 2021. "The Effect of Cigarillo Packaging Characteristics on Young Adult Perceptions and Intentions: An Experimental Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-12, April.
    6. Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd R. Stinebrickner, 2014. "A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 426-472.
    7. Engelberg, Joseph & Manski, Charles F. & Williams, Jared, 2009. "Comparing the Point Predictions and Subjective Probability Distributions of Professional Forecasters," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 27, pages 30-41.
    8. Jos'e Raimundo Carvalho & Diego de Maria Andr'e & Yuri Costa, 2023. "Individual Updating of Subjective Probability of Homicide Victimization: a "Natural Experiment'' on Risk Communication," Papers 2312.08171, arXiv.org.
    9. Nugroho, Adi, 2021. "Study of Airport Service Quality and Profitability in Indonesia," OSF Preprints ah2ns, Center for Open Science.
    10. Kirstin Lindloff & Nadine Pieper & Nils C. Bandelow & David M. Woisetschläger, 2014. "Drivers of carsharing diffusion in Germany: an actor-centred approach," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(3/4), pages 217-245.
    11. Tine Janžek & Petra Ziherl, 2013. "Overview of models and methods for measuring economic agent’s expectations," IFC Bulletins chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth IFC Conference on "Statistical issues and activities in a changing environment", Basel, 28-29 August 2012., volume 36, pages 172-179, Bank for International Settlements.
    12. Silvia Balia, 2007. "Reporting expected longevity and smoking: evidence from the SHARE," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 07/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    13. Romaniuk, Jenni & Nenycz-Thiel, Magda, 2016. "Lapsed buyers' durable brand consideration in emerging markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3645-3651.
    14. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.
    15. Das, J.W.M. & Dominitz, J. & van Soest, A.H.O., 1997. "Comparing Predictions and Outcomes : Theory and Application to Income Changes," Discussion Paper 1997-45, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    16. David V. Budescu & Timothy R. Johnson, 2011. "A model-based approach for the analysis of the calibration of probability judgments," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(8), pages 857-869, December.
    17. Doupnik, Timothy S. & Richter, Martin, 2003. "Interpretation of uncertainty expressions: a cross-national study," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 15-35, January.
    18. Wang, Qun & Jia, Guozhu & Song, Wenyan, 2022. "Identifying critical factors in systems with interrelated components: A method considering heterogeneous influence and strength attenuation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(1), pages 456-470.
    19. Conti, G.; & Giustinelli, P.;, 2022. "For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:6:p:607-621 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Ozer, Muammer, 2011. "Understanding the impacts of product knowledge and product type on the accuracy of intentions-based new product predictions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 359-369, June.

    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:eee:aumajo:v:18:y:2010:i:2:p:105-111. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/australasian-marketing-journal/ .

    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.