IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v17y1998i1p29-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Hierarchical Bayes Model of Primary and Secondary Demand

Author

Listed:
  • Neeraj Arora

    (Pamplin College of Business, 2056 Pamplin Hall, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0236)

  • Greg M. Allenby

    (Max M. Fisher College of Business, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210)

  • James L. Ginter

    (Max M. Fisher College of Business, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210)

Abstract

Product design, pricing policies, and promotional activities influence the primary and secondary demand for goods and services. Brand managers need to develop an understanding of the relationships between marketing mix decisions and consumer decisions of whether to purchase in the product category, which brand to buy, and how much to consume. Knowledge about factors most effective in influencing primary and secondary demand of a product allows firms to grow by enhancing their market share as well their market size. The purpose of this paper is to develop an individual level model that allows an investigation of both the primary and secondary aspects of consumer demand. Unlike models of only primary demand or only secondary demand, this more comprehensive model offers the opportunity to identify changes in product features that will result in the greatest increase in demand. It also offers the opportunity to differentially target consumer segments depending upon whether consumers are most likely to enter the market, increase their consumption level, or switch brands. In the proposed hierarchical Bayes model, an integrative framework that jointly models the discrete choice and continuous quantity components of consumer decision is employed instead of treating the two as independent. The model includes parameters that capture individual specific reservation value, attribute preference, and expenditure sensitivity. The model development is based upon the microeconomic theory of utility maximization. Heterogeneity in model parameters across the sample is captured by using a random effects specification guided by the underlying microeconomic model. This requires that some of the effects are strictly positive. This is accommodated through the use of a gamma distribution of heterogeneity for some of the parameters. A normal distribution of heterogeneity is used for the remaining parameters. Gibbs sampling is used to estimate the model. The key methodological contribution of this paper is that we show how to specify a hierarchical Bayes continuous random effects model that integrates consumer choice and quantity decisions such that individual-level parameters can be estimated. Individual level estimates are desirable because insights into primary demand involve nonlinear functions of model parameters. For example, consumers not in the market are those whose utilities for the choice alternatives fall below some reservation value. The proposed methodology yields individual specific estimates of reservation values and expenditure sensitivity, which allow assessment of the origins of demand other than the switching behavior of consumers. The methodology can also be used to help identify changes in product features most likely to bring new customers into a market. Our work differs from previous research in this area as we lay the framework needed to obtain individual-level parameter estimates in a continuous random effects model that integrates choice and quantity. The methodology is demonstrated with survey data collected about consumer preferences and consumption for a food item. For the data available, a large response heterogeneity was observed across all model parameters. In spite of limited data available at the individual level, a majority of the individual level estimates were found to be significant. Predictive tests demonstrated the superiority of the proposed model over existing latent class and aggregate models. Particularly, significant gains in predictive accuracy were observed for the “no-buy” behavior of the respondents. These gains demonstrate that by structurally linking the choice and quantity models results in a more accurate characterization of the market than existing finite mixture approaches that model choice and quantity independently. We show that our joint model makes more efficient use of the available data and results in better parameter estimates than those that assume independence. Finally, the individual level demand analysis is illustrated through a simple example involving a $1.00 price cut. We demonstrate practical usefulness of the model for targeting by developing the demographic, attitudinal, and behavioral profiles of consumer groups most likely to increase consumption, enter the market, or switch brands because of a price cut decision.

Suggested Citation

  • Neeraj Arora & Greg M. Allenby & James L. Ginter, 1998. "A Hierarchical Bayes Model of Primary and Secondary Demand," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 29-44.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:17:y:1998:i:1:p:29-44
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.17.1.29
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.17.1.29
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.17.1.29?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter M. Guadagni & John D. C. Little, 1983. "A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 203-238.
    2. Jeongwen Chiang, 1991. "A Simultaneous Approach to the Whether, What and How Much to Buy Questions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 297-315.
    3. Hanemann, W Michael, 1984. "Discrete-Continuous Models of Consumer Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 541-561, May.
    4. William R. Dillon & Sunil Gupta, 1996. "A Segment-Level Model of Category Volume and Brand Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 38-59.
    5. Greg M. Allenby & Peter E. Rossi, 1991. "Quality Perceptions and Asymmetric Switching Between Brands," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 185-204.
    6. Christensen, Laurits R & Jorgenson, Dale W & Lau, Lawrence J, 1975. "Transcendental Logarithmic Utility Functions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 367-383, June.
    7. Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 1993. "Investigating Purchase Incidence, Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Decisions of Households," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 184-208.
    8. David C. Schmittlein & Robert A. Peterson, 1994. "Customer Base Analysis: An Industrial Purchase Process Application," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 41-67.
    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. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Harikesh S. Nair, 2011. "Structural Workshop Paper --Discrete-Choice Models of Consumer Demand in Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 977-996, November.
    2. Greg M. Allenby & Thomas S. Shively & Sha Yang & Mark J. Garratt, 2004. "A Choice Model for Packaged Goods: Dealing with Discrete Quantities and Quantity Discounts," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 95-108, June.
    3. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Harikesh Nair & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Pradeep Chintagunta, 2005. "Accounting for Primary and Secondary Demand Effects with Aggregate Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 444-460, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Baohong Sun, 2005. "Promotion Effect on Endogenous Consumption," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 430-443, July.
    7. David R. Bell & Jeongwen Chiang & V. Padmanabhan, 1999. "The Decomposition of Promotional Response: An Empirical Generalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 504-526.
    8. 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.
    9. Jean-Pierre Dubé, 2004. "Multiple Discreteness and Product Differentiation: Demand for Carbonated Soft Drinks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 66-81, September.
    10. Liang Guo, 2006. "—Removing the Boundary Between Structural and Reduced-Form Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 629-632, 11-12.
    11. Marshall Freimer & Dan Horsky, 2008. "Try It, You Will Like It—Does Consumer Learning Lead to Competitive Price Promotions?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 796-810, 09-10.
    12. 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.
    13. Bhat, Chandra R., 2005. "A multiple discrete-continuous extreme value model: formulation and application to discretionary time-use decisions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 679-707, September.
    14. J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Russell S. Winer, 1999. "Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1324-1338, October.
    15. Bonnet, Céline & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Models of Consumer Demand for Differentiated Products," TSE Working Papers 16-741, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    16. Richards, Timothy J. & Gómez, Miguel I. & Pofahl, Geoffrey, 2012. "A Multiple-discrete/Continuous Model of Price Promotion," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 206-225.
    17. Pradeep Chintagunta & Tülin Erdem & Peter E. Rossi & Michel Wedel, 2006. "Structural Modeling in Marketing: Review and Assessment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 604-616, 11-12.
    18. Alegre, Joaquín & Mateo, Sara & Pou, Llorenç, 2011. "A latent class approach to tourists’ length of stay," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 555-563.
    19. Gázquez-Abad, Juan Carlos & Martínez-López, Francisco J., 2016. "Understanding the impact of store flyers on purchase behaviour: An empirical analysis in the context of Spanish households," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 263-273.
    20. Bhat, Chandra R., 2008. "The multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model: Role of utility function parameters, identification considerations, and model extensions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 274-303, March.

    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:inm:ormksc:v:17:y:1998:i:1:p:29-44. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.