IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/netspa/v21y2021i2d10.1007_s11067-021-09526-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Multi-Year Customers’ Considerations and Choices in China’s Auto Market Using Two-Stage Bipartite Network Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Youyi Bi

    (University of Michigan-Shanghai Jiao Tong University Joint Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University)

  • Yunjian Qiu

    (University of Southern California)

  • Zhenghui Sha

    (University of Arkansas)

  • Mingxian Wang

    (Ford Motor Company)

  • Yan Fu

    (Ford Motor Company)

  • Noshir Contractor

    (Northwestern University)

  • Wei Chen

    (Northwestern University)

Abstract

Choice modeling is important in transportation planning, marketing and engineering design, as it can quantify the influence of product attributes and customer demographics on customers’ choice behaviors. Consumer studies suggest that customers’ choice-making process often consists of two different stages: customers first consider subsets of available products on the market, and then make the final choice from the subsets. As existing preference modeling is mostly focused on the choice stage, there is a need to develop methods for understanding customer preferences at both stages, and investigate how customer preferences change from “consideration” to “choice”, and whether such changes will be consistent over time. In this paper, we study customers’ consideration and purchase behaviors in China’s auto market using multi-year survey datasets. We demonstrate how descriptive network analysis and analytic network models (bipartite Exponential Random Graph Model (ERGM)) capture the change of customers’ preferences from the consideration stage to the choice stage in multiple consecutive years. Our results show that factors such as fuel consumption per unit power, car make origin, and place of production influence customers’ considerations and final purchase decisions in different ways, and this difference between consideration and purchase is consistent over time. The main contribution of this study is that we validate the two-stage network-based modeling approach and its utility in preference elicitation using multiple-year dataset, which sheds lights on understanding the trend of customers’ consideration and choice behaviors across years. Our study also contributes to a refined interpretation of the ERGM results with categorization of continuous variables into ranges, which shows that customer choice decisions may be more qualitatively influenced by product attributes rather than quantitatively. Our approach is generic and thus can be applied to solving broader choice modeling problems, such as the transportation mode selection and the adoption of clean technology (e.g., electric vehicles).

Suggested Citation

  • Youyi Bi & Yunjian Qiu & Zhenghui Sha & Mingxian Wang & Yan Fu & Noshir Contractor & Wei Chen, 2021. "Modeling Multi-Year Customers’ Considerations and Choices in China’s Auto Market Using Two-Stage Bipartite Network Analysis," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 365-385, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:netspa:v:21:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s11067-021-09526-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11067-021-09526-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11067-021-09526-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11067-021-09526-9?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. Zhenghui Sha & Yun Huang & Jiawei Sophia Fu & Mingxian Wang & Yan Fu & Noshir Contractor & Wei Chen, 2018. "A Network-Based Approach to Modeling and Predicting Product Coconsideration Relations," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-14, January.
    2. Miaoxi Zhao & Ben Derudder & Pingcheng Zhang & Peiqian Zhong, 2020. "An Expanded Bipartite Network Projection Algorithm for Measuring Cities’ Connections in Service Firm Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 479-498, June.
    3. DUBOIS, Bernard & LAURENT, Gilles & CZELLAR, Sandor, 2001. "Consumer rapport to luxury : Analyzing complex and ambivalent attitudes," HEC Research Papers Series 736, HEC Paris.
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    5. Tom Broekel & Marcel Bednarz, 2018. "Disentangling link formation and dissolution in spatial networks: An Application of a Two-Mode STERGM to a Project-Based R&D Network in the German Biotechnology Industry," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 677-704, September.
    6. Turrentine, Tom & Kurani, Kenneth S, 2007. "Car buyers and fuel economy?," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt56x845v4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    7. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. "An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    8. Tanaka, Makoto & Ida, Takanori & Murakami, Kayo & Friedman, Lee, 2014. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for alternative fuel vehicles: A comparative discrete choice analysis between the US and Japan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 194-209.
    9. Meead Saberi & Taha H. Rashidi & Milad Ghasri & Kenneth Ewe, 2018. "A Complex Network Methodology for Travel Demand Model Evaluation and Validation," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 1051-1073, December.
    10. Hunter, David R. & Handcock, Mark S. & Butts, Carter T. & Goodreau, Steven M. & Morris, Martina, 2008. "ergm: A Package to Fit, Simulate and Diagnose Exponential-Family Models for Networks," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 24(i03).
    11. Morris, Martina & Handcock, Mark S. & Hunter, David R., 2008. "Specification of Exponential-Family Random Graph Models: Terms and Computational Aspects," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 24(i04).
    12. Qing Liu & Neeraj Arora, 2011. "Efficient Choice Designs for a Consider-Then-Choose Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 321-338, 03-04.
    13. Francisco Amador & Rosa González & Juan Dios Ortúzar, 2008. "On Confounding Preference Heterogeneity and Income Effect in Discrete Choice Models," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 97-108, September.
    14. Turrentine, Thomas S. & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2007. "Car buyers and fuel economy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1213-1223, February.
    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. Solimine, Philip & Isaac, R. Mark, 2023. "Reputation and market structure in experimental platforms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 528-559.

    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. Wolinetz, Michael & Axsen, Jonn, 2017. "How policy can build the plug-in electric vehicle market: Insights from the REspondent-based Preference And Constraints (REPAC) model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 238-250.
    2. Cornelius Fritz & Michael Lebacher & Göran Kauermann, 2020. "Tempus volat, hora fugit: A survey of tie‐oriented dynamic network models in discrete and continuous time," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 74(3), pages 275-299, August.
    3. Leard, Benjamin, 2018. "Consumer inattention and the demand for vehicle fuel cost savings," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 1-16.
    4. Martin, Elliott William, 2009. "New Vehicle Choice, Fuel Economy and Vehicle Incentives: An Analysis of Hybrid Tax Credits and the Gasoline Tax," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt5gd206wv, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Martin, Elliot William, 2009. "New Vehicle Choices, Fuel Economy and Vehicle Incentives: An Analysis of Hybrid Tax Credits and Gasoline Tax," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt6sz198c2, University of California Transportation Center.
    6. Goldschmidt, Rüdiger & Richter, Andreas & Pfeil, Raphael, 2019. "Active stakeholder involvement and organisational tasks as factors for an effective communication and governance strategy in the promotion of e-taxis. Results from a field research lab," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Weber, Sylvain, 2019. "Consumers' preferences on the Swiss car market: A revealed preference approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 109-118.
    8. Hössinger, Reinhard & Link, Christoph & Sonntag, Axel & Stark, Juliane, 2017. "Estimating the price elasticity of fuel demand with stated preferences derived from a situational approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 154-171.
    9. Malina, Christiane, 2016. "The environmental impact of vehicle circulation tax reform in Germany," CAWM Discussion Papers 86, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    10. Richard G. Newell & Juha Siikamäki, 2014. "Nudging Energy Efficiency Behavior: The Role of Information Labels," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 555-598.
    11. Helveston, John Paul & Liu, Yimin & Feit, Elea McDonnell & Fuchs, Erica & Klampfl, Erica & Michalek, Jeremy J., 2015. "Will subsidies drive electric vehicle adoption? Measuring consumer preferences in the U.S. and China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 96-112.
    12. Chen, Anning, 2011. "Reliable GPS Integer Ambiguity Resolution," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt9gs0t2f9, University of California Transportation Center.
    13. Lloro, Alicia & Brownstone, David, 2018. "Vehicle choice and utilization: Improving estimation with partially observed choices and hybrid pairs," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 137-152.
    14. Lu, Zhentong, 2022. "Estimating multinomial choice models with unobserved choice sets," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 226(2), pages 368-398.
    15. Williams, Brett D, 2010. "Commercializing Light-Duty Plug-In/Plug-Out Hydrogen-Fuel-Cell Vehicles: "Mobile Electricity" Technologies, Early California Household Markets, and Innovation Management," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt15f9495j, University of California Transportation Center.
    16. Berliner, Rosaria, 2018. "Drivers of Change in a World of Mobility Disruption: An Overview of Long Distance Travel, Shared Mobility, and Automated Vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6r64v86z, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    17. Larson, Paul D. & Viáfara, Jairo & Parsons, Robert V. & Elias, Arne, 2014. "Consumer attitudes about electric cars: Pricing analysis and policy implications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 299-314.
    18. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.
    19. Qian, Lixian & Grisolía, Jose M. & Soopramanien, Didier, 2019. "The impact of service and government-policy attributes on consumer preferences for electric vehicles in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 70-84.
    20. Xie, Fei & Lin, Zhenhong, 2017. "Market-driven automotive industry compliance with fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards: Analysis based on consumer choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 299-311.

    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:kap:netspa:v:21:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s11067-021-09526-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.