IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jouret/v98y2022i3p432-452.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of different types of in-store displays on consumer purchase behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Han, Yoonju
  • Chandukala, Sandeep R.
  • Li, Shibo

Abstract

Research on consumer in-store shopping behavior does not account for the existence of different types of display locations (e.g. storefront, store rear, secondary, front end cap, rear end cap, and shelf displays). This article focuses on accounting for and understanding the impact of various displays on consumer purchase behavior based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response (SOR) theory. Specifically, we study how displays closer to and farther from the main location of the focal category influence consumer purchase behavior. Furthermore, within the different types of displays we investigate the impact of specific types of displays on consumer's category purchase and brand choice and the moderating role of price and discounts. A hierarchical Bayesian model is estimated using scanner panel data for a large U.S. grocery chain that contains unique information on the number of product facings at multiple display locations within a store. We find that displays closer to the focal category have a larger impact, with front end cap displays having the largest impact on category purchase and shelf displays having the largest impact on brand choice. We also demonstrate the synergistic impact of price and discounts in enhancing the impact of displays on consumer purchase behavior and brand choice. Equipped with these findings we propose a display allocation optimization that results in an average increase in revenue of about 11.15% and a strategy to distribute displays across all locations in the store rather than letting one location dominate.

Suggested Citation

  • Han, Yoonju & Chandukala, Sandeep R. & Li, Shibo, 2022. "Impact of different types of in-store displays on consumer purchase behavior," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 432-452.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jouret:v:98:y:2022:i:3:p:432-452
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jretai.2021.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022435921000634
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jretai.2021.10.002?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. Sha Yang & Yuxin Chen & Greg Allenby, 2003. "Reply to Comments on “Bayesian Analysis of Simultaneous Demand and Supply”," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 299-304, September.
    2. Jie Zhang & Lakshman Krishnamurthi, 2004. "Customizing Promotions in Online Stores," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 561-578, June.
    3. Eroglu, Sevgin A. & Machleit, Karen A. & Davis, Lenita M., 2001. "Atmospheric qualities of online retailing: A conceptual model and implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 177-184, November.
    4. Greenwald, Anthony G & Leavitt, Clark, 1984. "Audience Involvement in Advertising: Four Levels," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 11(1), pages 581-592, June.
    5. Amy Wenxuan Ding & Shibo Li & Patrali Chatterjee, 2015. "Learning User Real-Time Intent for Optimal Dynamic Web Page Transformation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 339-359, June.
    6. Sha Yang & Yuxin Chen & Greg Allenby, 2003. "Bayesian Analysis of Simultaneous Demand and Supply," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 251-275, September.
    7. Randolph E. Bucklin & James M. Lattin, 1991. "A Two-State Model of Purchase Incidence and Brand Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 24-39.
    8. Eric T. Anderson & Duncan I. Simester, 1998. "The Role of Sale Signs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 139-155.
    9. Breugelmans, Els & Campo, Katia, 2011. "Effectiveness of In-Store Displays in a Virtual Store Environment," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 75-89.
    10. Sanghak Lee & Jaehwan Kim & Greg M. Allenby, 2013. "A Direct Utility Model for Asymmetric Complements," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 454-470, May.
    11. Ratneshwar, S & Pechmann, Cornelia & Shocker, Allan D, 1996. "Goal-Derived Categories and the Antecedents of Across-Category Consideration," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 23(3), pages 240-250, December.
    12. J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Russell S. Winer, 1999. "Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1324-1338, October.
    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. Garrido-Morgado, à lvaro & González-Benito, Óscar, 2024. "Applying the triple coherence line to in-store marketing plans to increase private label market share," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. Mareike Sachse & Sebastian Oetzel & Daniel Klapper, 2023. "I'll Try That, Too - A Field Experiment in Retailing on the Effect of Variety During Display Promotions," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 404, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    3. Zhang, Ziqiong & Wang, Bowen & Law, Rob & Han, Yu, 2024. "Public health emergencies and travelers' review efforts," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    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. Yonezawa, Koichi & Gomez, Miguel I. & Richards, Timothy J., 2018. "The Robinson-Patman Act and Vertical Relationships in Food Retailing," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274204, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Agarwal, Manoj K. & Ma, Zecong & Park, Chang Hee & Zheng, Yilong, 2022. "The impact of a manufacturer’s financial liquidity on its market strategies and pricing and promotion decisions in retail grocery markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 844-857.
    3. Çakır, Metin & Balagtas, Joseph V., 2014. "Consumer Response to Package Downsizing: Evidence from the Chicago Ice Cream Market," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 1-12.
    4. Yonezawa, Koichi & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Competitive Package Size Decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(4), pages 445-469.
    5. Jorge Silva-Risso & Irina Ionova, 2008. "—A Nested Logit Model of Product and Transaction-Type Choice for Planning Automakers' Pricing and Promotions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 545-566, 07-08.
    6. Hruschka, Harald, 2010. "Considering endogeneity for optimal catalog allocation in direct marketing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(1), pages 239-247, October.
    7. Guhl, Daniel, 2019. "Addressing endogeneity in aggregate logit models with time-varying parameters for optimal retail-pricing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 684-698.
    8. Thomas Otter & Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2011. "Testing Models of Strategic Behavior Characterized by Conditional Likelihoods," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 686-701, July.
    9. Fernández-Antolín, Anna & Guevara, C. Angelo & de Lapparent, Matthieu & Bierlaire, Michel, 2016. "Correcting for endogeneity due to omitted attitudes: Empirical assessment of a modified MIS method using RP mode choice data," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-15.
    10. Michaela Draganska & Dipak Jain, 2004. "A Likelihood Approach to Estimating Market Equilibrium Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 605-616, May.
    11. Sha Yang & Shijie Lu & Xianghua Lu, 2014. "Modeling Competition and Its Impact on Paid-Search Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 134-153, January.
    12. Andrés Musalem & Marcelo Olivares & Eric T. Bradlow & Christian Terwiesch & Daniel Corsten, 2010. "Structural Estimation of the Effect of Out-of-Stocks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(7), pages 1180-1197, July.
    13. Liang Guo, 2006. "—Removing the Boundary Between Structural and Reduced-Form Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 629-632, 11-12.
    14. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Michel Wedel & Jie Zhang & Fred Feinberg, 2015. "Implementing Retail Category Management: a Model-Based Approach to Setting Optimal Markups," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(2), pages 165-176, June.
    16. Michael Lewis & Yanwen Wang & Chunhua Wu, 2019. "Season Ticket Buyer Value and Secondary Market Options," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 973-993, November.
    17. Tibert Verhagen & Daniel Bloemers, 2018. "Exploring the cognitive and affective bases of online purchase intentions: a hierarchical test across product types," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 537-561, September.
    18. Philippe Aurier & Anne Broz-Giroux, 2014. "Modeling advertising impact at campaign level: Empirical generalizations relative to long-term advertising profit contribution and its antecedents," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 193-206, June.
    19. Nitin Mehta, 2007. "Investigating Consumers' Purchase Incidence and Brand Choice Decisions Across Multiple Product Categories: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 196-217, 03-04.
    20. Rutger Oest, 2005. "Which Brands Gain Share from Which Brands? Inference from Store-Level Scanner Data," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 281-304, September.

    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:jouret:v:98:y:2022:i:3:p:432-452. 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/journal-of-retailing .

    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.