IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb373/200084.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investigation of the stochastic utility maximization process of consumer brand choice by semiparametric modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Abe, Makoto
  • Boztuæg, Yasemin
  • Hildebrandt, Lutz

Abstract

The use of nonparametric methods, which posit fewer assumptions and greater model flexibility than parametric methods, could provide useful insights when studying brand choice. It was found, however, that the data requirement for a fully nonparametric brand choice model is so great that obtaining such large data sets is difficult even in marketing. Semiparametric methods balance model flexibility and data requirement by imposing some parametric structure on components that are not sensitive to such assumptions while leaving the essential component nonparametric. In this paper, the authors compare two semiparametric brand choice models that are based on the generalized additive models (GAM). One model is specified as a nonparametric logistic regression of GAM (Hastie and Tibshirani 1986) with one equation for each brand. The other model is a multinomial logit (MNL) formulation with a nonparametric utility function, which is derived by extending the GAM framework (Abe 1999). Both models assume a parametric distribution for the random component, but capture the response of covariates nonparametrically. The competitive structure of the logistic regression formulation is specified by data through nonparametric response functions of the attributes for the competitive brands, whereas that of the MNL formulation is guided by the choice theory of stochastic utility maximization (SUM). Simulation study and application to actual scanner panel data seem to support the behavioral assumption of SUM. In addition, if we relax the SUM assumption by letting data specify the competitive structure, a substantially larger amount of data, perhaps an order of magnitude more, would be required. Therefore, if alternative brands are chosen carefully, nonparametric relaxation to capture cross effect (i.e., nonparametrization of the MNL structure) may not be warranted unless the size of database becomes substantially larger than the one currently used.

Suggested Citation

  • Abe, Makoto & Boztuæg, Yasemin & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 2000. "Investigation of the stochastic utility maximization process of consumer brand choice by semiparametric modeling," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2000,84, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb373:200084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/62233/1/723858462.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abe, Makoto, 1999. "A Generalized Additive Model for Discrete-Choice Data," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 17(3), pages 271-284, July.
    2. Boztuğ, Yasemin & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 1998. "Nicht- und semiparametrische Markenwahlmodelle im Marketing," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1998,99, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    3. J. P. Nielsen & O. B. Linton, 1998. "An optimization interpretation of integration and back‐fitting estimators for separable nonparametric models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 60(1), pages 217-222.
    4. 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.
    5. Makoto Abe, 1995. "A Nonparametric Density Estimation Method for Brand Choice Using Scanner Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 300-325.
    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. 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.
    2. Guhl, Daniel & Baumgartner, Bernhard & Kneib, Thomas & Steiner, Winfried J., 2018. "Estimating time-varying parameters in brand choice models: A semiparametric approach," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 394-414.
    3. Bernhard Baumgartner & Daniel Guhl & Thomas Kneib & Winfried J. Steiner, 2018. "Flexible estimation of time-varying effects for frequently purchased retail goods: a modeling approach based on household panel data," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 40(4), pages 837-873, October.
    4. Boztuğ, Yasemin & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 1998. "Nicht- und semiparametrische Markenwahlmodelle im Marketing," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1998,99, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    5. Hruschka, Harald & Fettes, Werner & Probst, Markus, 2004. "An empirical comparison of the validity of a neural net based multinomial logit choice model to alternative model specifications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 166-180, November.
    6. Venkatesh Shankar & Pablo Azar & Matthew Fuller, 2008. "—: A Multicategory Brand Equity Model and Its Application at Allstate," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 567-584, 07-08.
    7. Noah Gans & George Knox & Rachel Croson, 2007. "Simple Models of Discrete Choice and Their Performance in Bandit Experiments," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 383-408, December.
    8. Chen Zhou & Shrihari Sridhar & Rafael Becerril-Arreola & Tony Haitao Cui & Yan Dong, 2019. "Promotions as competitive reactions to recalls and their consequences," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 702-722, July.
    9. 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.
    10. Polo, Yolanda & Sese, F. Javier & Verhoef, Peter C., 2011. "The Effect of Pricing and Advertising on Customer Retention in a Liberalizing Market," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 201-214.
    11. Yücel, Eda & Karaesmen, Fikri & Salman, F. Sibel & Türkay, Metin, 2009. "Optimizing product assortment under customer-driven demand substitution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 759-768, December.
    12. 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.
    13. Yu Ding & Wayne S. DeSarbo & Dominique M. Hanssens & Kamel Jedidi & John G. Lynch & Donald R. Lehmann, 2020. "The past, present, and future of measurement and methods in marketing analysis," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 175-186, September.
    14. Patrick Saart & Jiti Gao & Nam Hyun Kim, 2014. "Semiparametric methods in nonlinear time series analysis: a selective review," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 141-169, March.
    15. Shivaram Subramanian & Hanif Sherali, 2010. "A fractional programming approach for retail category price optimization," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 263-277, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Francesca Bassi & Fulvia Pennoni & Luca Rossetto, 2020. "The Italian market of sparkling wines: Latent variable models for brand positioning, customer loyalty, and transitions across brands' preferences," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 542-567, October.
    18. Vishal Gaur & Young-Hoon Park, 2007. "Asymmetric Consumer Learning and Inventory Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 227-240, February.
    19. Ravn, Morten O. & Schmitt-Grohe, Stephanie & Uribe, Martín & Uuskula, Lenno, 2010. "Deep habits and the dynamic effects of monetary policy shocks," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 236-258, June.
    20. Degui Li & Oliver Linton & Zudi Lu, 2012. "A Flexible Semiparametric Model for Time Series," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 17/12, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business 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:zbw:sfb373:200084. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfhubde.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.