IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v30y2011i4p717-736.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No Customer Left Behind: A Distribution-Free Bayesian Approach to Accounting for Missing Xs in Marketing Models

Author

Listed:
  • Yi Qian

    (Department of Marketing, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208)

  • Hui Xie

    (Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois 60612)

Abstract

In marketing applications, it is common that some key covariates in a regression model, such as marketing mix variables or consumer profiles, are subject to missingness. The convenient method that excludes the consumers with missingness in any covariate can result in a substantial loss of efficiency and may lead to strong selection bias in the estimation of consumer preferences and sensitivities. To solve these problems, we propose a new Bayesian distribution-free approach, which can ensure that no customer is left behind in the analysis as a result of missing covariates. In this way, all customers are being considered in devising managerial policies. The proposed approach allows for flexible modeling of a joint distribution of multidimensional interrelated covariates that can contain both continuous and discrete variables. At the same time, it minimizes the impact of distributional assumptions involved in covariate modeling because the method does not require researchers to specify parametric distributions for covariates and can automatically generate suitable distributions for missing covariates. We have developed an efficient Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm for inference. Besides robustness and flexibility, the proposed approach reduces modeling and computational efforts associated with missing covariates and therefore makes the missing covariate problems easier to handle. We evaluate the performance of the proposed method using extensive simulation studies. We then illustrate the method in two real data examples in which missing covariates occur: a mixed multinomial logit discrete-choice model in a ketchup data set and a hierarchical probit purchase incidence model in a retail store data set. These analyses demonstrate that the proposed method overcomes several important limitations of existing approaches for solving missing covariate problems and offers opportunities to make better managerial decisions with the current available marketing databases. Although our applications focus on consumer-level data, the proposed method is general and can be applied to other marketing applications where other types of marketing players are the units of analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2011. "No Customer Left Behind: A Distribution-Free Bayesian Approach to Accounting for Missing Xs in Marketing Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 717-736, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:30:y:2011:i:4:p:717-736
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1110.0648
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1110.0648
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.1110.0648?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. Joseph G. Ibrahim & Ming-Hui Chen & Stuart R. Lipsitz & Amy H. Herring, 2005. "Missing-Data Methods for Generalized Linear Models: A Comparative Review," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 332-346, March.
    2. Seetharaman, P B & Chintagunta, Pradeep K, 2003. "The Proportional Hazard Model for Purchase Timing: A Comparison of Alternative Specifications," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(3), pages 368-382, July.
    3. Hua Yun Chen, 2004. "Nonparametric and Semiparametric Models for Missing Covariates in Parametric Regression," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 1176-1189, December.
    4. Jeongwen Chiang, 1995. "Competing Coupon Promotions and Category Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 105-122.
    5. Sha Yang & Yi Zhao & Ravi Dhar, 2010. "Modeling the Underreporting Bias in Panel Survey Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 525-539, 05-06.
    6. Vishal P. Singh & Karsten T. Hansen & Robert C. Blattberg, 2006. "Market Entry and Consumer Behavior: An Investigation of a Wal-Mart Supercenter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 457-476, September.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Eleanor McDonnell Feit & Mark A. Beltramo & Fred M. Feinberg, 2010. "Reality Check: Combining Choice Experiments with Market Data to Estimate the Importance of Product Attributes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 785-800, May.
    10. Romana Khan & Michael Lewis & Vishal Singh, 2009. "Dynamic Customer Management and the Value of One-to-One Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 1063-1079, 11-12.
    11. Paul Meier & Theodore Karrison & Rick Chappell & Hui Xie, 2004. "The Price of Kaplan-Meier," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 890-896, January.
    12. Yi Qian, 2007. "Do National Patent Laws Stimulate Domestic Innovation in a Global Patenting Environment? A Cross-Country Analysis of Pharmaceutical Patent Protection, 1978-2002," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 436-453, August.
    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. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2013. "Drive More Effective Data-Based Innovations: Enhancing the Utility of Secure Databases," NBER Working Papers 19586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Rajkumar Venkatesan & Alexander Bleier & Werner Reinartz & Nalini Ravishanker, 2019. "Improving customer profit predictions with customer mindset metrics through multiple overimputation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 771-794, September.
    3. Yi Qian, 2014. "Counterfeiters: Foes or Friends? How Counterfeits Affect Sales by Product Quality Tier," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(10), pages 2381-2400, October.
    4. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2022. "Simplifying Bias Correction for Selective Sampling: A Unified Distribution-Free Approach to Handling Endogenously Selected Samples," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 336-360, March.
    5. Lu, Huidi & van der Lans, Ralf & Helsen, Kristiaan & Gauri, Dinesh K., 2023. "DEPART: Decomposing prices using atheoretical regression trees," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 781-800.
    6. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2014. "Which Brand Purchasers Are Lost to Counterfeiters? An Application of New Data Fusion Approaches," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 437-448, May.
    7. Maaya, Leonard & Meulders, Michel & Vandebroek, Martina, 2021. "Joint analysis of preferences and drop out data in discrete choice experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2015. "Drive More Effective Data-Based Innovations: Enhancing the Utility of Secure Databases," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 520-541, March.

    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. 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.
    2. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2014. "Which Brand Purchasers Are Lost to Counterfeiters? An Application of New Data Fusion Approaches," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 437-448, May.
    3. Makoto Abe & Yasemin Boztug & Lutz Hildebrandt, 2004. "Investigating the competitive assumption of Multinomial Logit models of brand choice by nonparametric modeling," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 635-657, December.
    4. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2020. "How much do consumers know about the quality of products? Evidence from the diaper market," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 541-569, October.
    5. 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.
    6. B. P. S. Murthi & Sumit Sarkar, 2003. "The Role of the Management Sciences in Research on Personalization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1344-1362, October.
    7. Chiang, Jeongwen & Chib, Siddhartha & Narasimhan, Chakravarthi, 1998. "Markov chain Monte Carlo and models of consideration set and parameter heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 223-248, November.
    8. Zhuoer Sun & Suojin Wang, 2019. "Semiparametric estimation in regression with missing covariates using single-index models," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 71(5), pages 1201-1232, October.
    9. Liye Ma & Ramayya Krishnan & Alan L. Montgomery, 2015. "Latent Homophily or Social Influence? An Empirical Analysis of Purchase Within a Social Network," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 454-473, February.
    10. Abramson, Charles & Buchmueller, Thomas & Currim, Imran, 1998. "Models of health plan choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 228-247, December.
    11. Konstantin Kogan & Avi Herbon & Beatrice Venturi, 2020. "Direct marketing of an event under hazards of customer saturation and forgetting," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 295(1), pages 207-227, December.
    12. 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.
    13. Joffre Swait & Rick L. Andrews, 2003. "Enriching Scanner Panel Models with Choice Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 442-460, September.
    14. Yang Zhao & Meng Liu, 2021. "Unified approach for regression models with nonmonotone missing at random data," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 105(1), pages 87-101, March.
    15. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2013. "Drive More Effective Data-Based Innovations: Enhancing the Utility of Secure Databases," NBER Working Papers 19586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Nishtha Langer & Chris Forman & Sunder Kekre & Baohong Sun, 2012. "Ushering Buyers into Electronic Channels: An Empirical Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1212-1231, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Desai, Kalpesh Kaushik & Gauri, Dinesh Kumar & Ma, Yu, 2014. "An Empirical Investigation of Composite Product Choice," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 493-510.
    19. Volle, Pierre, 2001. "The short-term effect of store-level promotions on store choice, and the moderating role of individual variables," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 63-73, August.
    20. 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.

    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:30:y:2011:i:4:p:717-736. 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.