IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb649/sfb649dp2007-062.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Das hybride Wahlmodell und seine Anwendung im Marketing

Author

Listed:
  • Dannewald, Till
  • Kreis, Henning
  • Silberhorn, Nadja

Abstract

Traditional choice models assume that observable behavior results from an unspecified evaluation process of the observed individual. When it comes to the revelation of this process mere choice models rapidly meet their boundaries, as psychological factors (e.g., consumers' perception or attitudes towards products) are not directly measurable variables and therefore cannot offhand be integrated within the model structure. The causal-analytic approach offers the possibility to specify not directly measurable factors as latent variables, and can thus reasonably supplement choice models. So far, methodological approaches investigating latent variables, and traditional choice models are perceived and applied independently of one another. In this paper the possibilities of an integration of latent variables into traditional choice models is pointed out, and an introduction into the modeling of hybrid choice models is provided. Furthermore, potential areas of application in marketing research are outlined.

Suggested Citation

  • Dannewald, Till & Kreis, Henning & Silberhorn, Nadja, 2007. "Das hybride Wahlmodell und seine Anwendung im Marketing," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2007-062, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb649:sfb649dp2007-062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/25234/1/558640621.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Denis Bolduc & Bernard Fortin & Stephen Gordon, 1997. "Multinomial Probit Estimation of Spatially Interdependent Choices: An Empirical Comparison of Two New Techniques," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 20(1-2), pages 77-101, April.
    2. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-426, March.
    3. Walker, Joan & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2002. "Generalized random utility model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 303-343, July.
    4. Keane, Michael P, 1997. "Modeling Heterogeneity and State Dependence in Consumer Choice Behavior," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 15(3), pages 310-327, July.
    5. McFadden, Daniel, 1980. "Econometric Models for Probabilistic Choice among Products," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(3), pages 13-29, July.
    6. Jarvis, Cheryl Burke & MacKenzie, Scott B & Podsakoff, Philip M, 2003. "A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 199-218, September.
    7. Vredin Johansson, Maria & Heldt, Tobias & Johansson, Per, 2005. "Latent Variables in a Travel Mode Choice Model: Attitudinal and Behavioural Indicator Variables," Working Paper Series 2005:5, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    9. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    12. Elrod, Terry & Keane, Michael, 1995. "A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data," MPRA Paper 52434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Andrew Ainslie & Peter E. Rossi, 1998. "Similarities in Choice Behavior Across Product Categories," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 91-106.
    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. Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 1993. "Investigating Purchase Incidence, Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Decisions of Households," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 184-208.
    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. Paunic, Alida, 2009. "I did it my way," MPRA Paper 17547, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. 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.
    2. Daziano, Ricardo A., 2015. "Inference on mode preferences, vehicle purchases, and the energy paradox using a Bayesian structural choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-26.
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    4. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    5. Michael P. Keane & Nada Wasi, 2013. "The Structure of Consumer Taste Heterogeneity in Revealed vs. Stated Preference Data," Economics Papers 2013-W10, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    6. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2005-028 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. 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.
    8. Andy S. Choi & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Cultural Attitudes as WTP Determinants: A Revised Cultural Worldview Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-18, June.
    9. Pradeep Chintagunta & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Khim Yong Goh, 2005. "Beyond the Endogeneity Bias: The Effect of Unmeasured Brand Characteristics on Household-Level Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 832-849, May.
    10. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Bonnet, Céline & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Models of Consumer Demand for Differentiated Products," TSE Working Papers 16-741, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    12. Mohamed Lachaab & Asim Ansari & Kamel Jedidi & Abdelwahed Trabelsi, 2006. "Modeling preference evolution in discrete choice models: A Bayesian state-space approach," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 57-81, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Hongmin Li & Scott Webster & Gwangjae Yu, 2020. "Product Design Under Multinomial Logit Choices: Optimization of Quality and Prices in an Evolving Product Line," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1011-1025, September.
    15. Joseph Pancras, 2010. "A Framework to Determine the Value of Consumer Consideration Set Information for Firm Pricing Strategies," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 269-300, March.
    16. Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Panel data discrete choice models of consumer demand," Economics Papers 2013-W08, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    17. Boztuğ, Yasemin & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 2005. "A market basket analysis conducted with a multivariate logit model," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2005-028, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    18. Allender, William J. & Richards, Timothy J., 2009. "Measures of Brand Loyalty," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49536, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Temme, Dirk & Paulssen, Marcel & Dannewald, Till, 2007. "Integrating latent variables in discrete choice models: How higher-order values and attitudes determine consumer choice," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2007-065, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    20. Guhl, Daniel, 2024. "Tracking time-varying brand equity using household panel data," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    21. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Hybrid choice model; latent variables; causal model; choice model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M30 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - General
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • C10 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download 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:sfb649:sfb649dp2007-062. 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/sohubde.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.