IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v118y1999i2p315-331.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the effects of new brand introduction on inter-brand strategic interaction

Author

Listed:
  • Chintagunta, Pradeep K.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Chintagunta, Pradeep K., 1999. "Measuring the effects of new brand introduction on inter-brand strategic interaction," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 315-331, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:118:y:1999:i:2:p:315-331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(99)00028-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-426, March.
    2. Füsun Gönül & Kannan Srinivasan, 1993. "Modeling Multiple Sources of Heterogeneity in Multinomial Logit Models: Methodological and Managerial Issues," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 213-229.
    3. 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.
    4. Matzkin, Rosa L., 1993. "Nonparametric identification and estimation of polychotomous choice models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1-2), pages 137-168, July.
    5. Elrod, Terry & Keane, Michael, 1995. "A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data," MPRA Paper 52434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Fraser, Cynthia & Bradford, John W, 1983. "Competitive Market Structure Analysis: Principal Partitioning of Revealed Substitutabilities," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(1), pages 15-30, June.
    7. Greg M. Allenby, 1989. "A Unified Approach to Identifying, Estimating and Testing Demand Structures with Aggregate Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 265-280.
    8. Terry Elrod, 1988. "Choice Map: Inferring a Product-Market Map from Panel Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 21-40.
    9. Tülin Erdem, 1996. "A Dynamic Analysis of Market Structure Based on Panel Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 359-378.
    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. Kapoor, Harish & Heslop, Louise A., 2009. "Brand positivity and competitive effects on the evaluation of brand extensions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 228-237.
    2. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2008-057 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Hildebrandt, Lutz & Kalweit, Lea, 2008. "Measuring changes in preferences and perception due to the entry of a new brand with choice data," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2008-057, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    4. Yang, Chih-Wen & Sung, Yen-Ching, 2010. "Constructing a mixed-logit model with market positioning to analyze the effects of new mode introduction," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 175-182.
    5. Kornelis, Marcel & Dekimpe, Marnik G. & Leeflang, Peter S.H., 2008. "Does competitive entry structurally change key marketing metrics?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 173-182.

    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. 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.
    2. Karsten Hansen & Vishal Singh, 2009. "Market Structure Across Retail Formats," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 656-673, 07-08.
    3. Dan Horsky & Sanjog Misra & Paul Nelson, 2006. "Observed and Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity in Brand-Choice Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 322-335, 07-08.
    4. Oliver J. Rutz & Garrett P. Sonnier, 2011. "The Evolution of Internal Market Structure," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 274-289, 03-04.
    5. Tülin Erdem & Susumu Imai & Michael Keane, 2003. "Brand and Quantity Choice Dynamics Under Price Uncertainty," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 5-64, March.
    6. Keane, Michael, 2004. "Modeling Health Insurance Choice Using the Heterogeneous Logit Model," MPRA Paper 55203, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Erdem, Tulin & Winer, Russell S., 1998. "Econometric modeling of competition: A multi-category choice-based mapping approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 159-175, November.
    8. José M. Labeaga & Mercedes Martos-Partal, 2007. "A Proposal to Distinguish State Dependence and Unobserved Heterogeneity in Binary Brand Choice Models," Working Papers 2007-02, FEDEA.
    9. Paulo Albuquerque & Bart J. Bronnenberg, 2009. "Estimating Demand Heterogeneity Using Aggregated Data: An Application to the Frozen Pizza Category," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 356-372, 03-04.
    10. Joonwook Park & Priyali Rajagopal & Wayne DeSarbo, 2012. "A New Heterogeneous Multidimensional Unfolding Procedure," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 263-287, April.
    11. González-Benito, Óscar & Martínez-Ruiz, María Pilar & Mollá-Descals, Alejandro, 2009. "Using store level scanner data to improve category management decisions: Developing positioning maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 666-674, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Rinus Haaijer & Michel Wedel & Marco Vriens & Tom Wansbeek, 1998. "Utility Covariances and Context Effects in Conjoint MNP Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252.
    14. Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 1998. "Inertia and Variety Seeking in a Model of Brand-Purchase Timing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 253-270.
    15. Junghyun Park & Minki Kim & Pradeep K Chintagunta, 2022. "Mapping Consumers’ Context-Dependent Consumption Preferences: A Multidimensional Unfolding Approach [An Empirical Comparison of Logit Choice Models with Discrete versus Continuous Representations o," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(2), pages 202-228.
    16. Haaijer, Marinus E., 1996. "Predictions in conjoint choice experiments : the x-factor probit model," Research Report 96B22, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    17. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    18. Amit Gandhi & Jeremy T. Fox, 2009. "Identifying Heterogeneity in Economic Choice and Selection Models Using Mixtures," 2009 Meeting Papers 165, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    20. Friederike Paetz & Winfried J. Steiner, 2017. "The benefits of incorporating utility dependencies in finite mixture probit models," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 39(3), pages 793-819, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ejores:v:118:y:1999:i:2:p:315-331. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.