Skip to main content
Log in

When worlds collide: The implications of panel data-based choice models for consumer behavior

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Panel data, both diary and scanner, have been analyzed by marketing scientists for over thirty years. One of the important uses of panel data is to better understand consumer behavior by developing and testing hypotheses using the revealed preference data rather than experimental data that uses only self-reported behavior or behavior in a simulated choice environment. The purpose of this paper is to suggest areas of research where panel data can be used to better understand the underlying behavior of the panel members.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abraham, Magid M., and Leonard Lodish. (1991). “Fact-Based Strategies for Managing Advertising and Promotion Dollars.” InHow Advertising Works, Vol. I. Chicago, IL: Information Resources, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, Rick L., and T.C. Srinivasan. (1994). “Studying Consideration Effects in Empirical Choice Models Using Scanner Panel Data,” Working paper, University of Delaware.

  • Berger, Ida E., and Andrew A. Mitchell. (1989). “The Effect of Advertising on Attitude Accessibility, Attitude Confidence, and the Attitude-Behavior Relationship,”Journal of Consumer Research 16 (December), 269–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blattberg, Robert C., and Kenneth J. Wisniewski. (1989). “Price-Induced Patterns of Competition,”Marketing Science 8 (Fall), 291–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, Mark, and Andrew Daly. (1993). “Estimation of Logit Models using Information from Both Stated Preferences and Revealed Preferences.” Working paper, Hague Consulting Group.

  • Bucklin, Randolph E., and James M. Lattin. (1991). “A Two-State Model of Purchase Incidence and Brand Choice,”Marketing Science 10 (Winter), 24–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Darral J. (1976). “Econometric Measurement of the Duration of Advertising Effect on Sales,”Journal of Marketing Research 13 (November), 345–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Currim, Imran, and Linda G. Schneider. (1991). “A Taxonomy of Consumer Purchase Strategies in a Promotion Intensive Environment,”Marketing Science 10 (Spring), 91–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deighton, John, Caroline M. Henderson, and Scott A. Neslin. (1994). “The Effects of Advertising on Brand Switching and Repeat Purchasing,”Journal of Marketing Research, forthcoming.

  • Erdem, Tulin. (1993). “Dynamic Brand Choice and Product Market Signalling under Imperfect Information,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Alberta.

  • Erdem, Tulin, and Michael Keane. (1993). “Structural Modelling of Brand Choice Dynamics under Uncertainty.” Working paper, University of California, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Ronald E. (1962). “Brand Choice as a Probability Process,”Journal of Business 35 (January), 43–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodstein, Ronald C. (1993). “Category-based Applications and Extensions in Advertising: Motivating More Extensive Ad Processing,”Journal of Consumer Research 20 (June), 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guadagni, Peter M., and John D.C. Little. (1983). “A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data,”Marketing Science 2 (Summer), 203–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardie, Bruce G.S., Eric J. Johnson, and Peter S. Fader. (1993). “Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice,”Marketing Science 12 (Fall), 378–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inman, J. Jeffrey, and Leigh McAlister. (1994). “Do Coupon Expiration Dates Affect Consumer Behavior?,”Journal of Marketing Research, forthcoming.

  • Kahn, Barbara E., and Jagmohan S. Raju. (1991). “Effects of Price Promotions on Variety-Seeking and Reinforcement,”Marketing Science 10 (Fall), 316–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalyanamaran, G.K., and John D.C. Little. (1994). “An Empirical Analysis of Latitude of Price Acceptance in Consumer Package Goods.” forthcoming,Journals of Consumer Research.

  • Kamakura, Wagner A., and Gary J. Russell. (1989). “A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure,”Journal of Marketing Research 26 (November), 379–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanetkar, Vinay, Charles B. Weinberg, and Doyle L. Weiss. (1992). “Price Sensitivity and Television Advertising Exposures: Some Empirical Findings,”Marketing Science 11 (Fall), 359–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishna, Aradhna. (1992). “The Normative Impact of Consumer Price Expectations for Multiple Brands on Consumer Purchase Behavior,”Marketing Science 11 (Summer), 266–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuehn, Alfred A. (1962). “Consumer Brand Choice as a Learning Process,”Journal of Advertising Research, 10–17.

  • McQueen, Josh, Carol Foley, and John Deighton. (1993). “Decomposing a Brand's Customer Franchise into Buyer Types.” In David A. Aaker and Alexander L. Biel (eds.),Brand Equity and Advertising: Advertising's Role in Building Strong Brands. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulhern, Francis J., and Robert P. Leone. (1991). “Implicit Price Bundling of Retail Products: A Multiproduct Approach of Maximizing Store Profitability,”Journal of Marketing 55 (October), 63–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murthi, B.P.S., and Kannan Srinivasan. (1994). “A Study of Consumer Search in Brand Choice.” Working paper, Carnegie-Mellon University.

  • Nedungadi, P.A., Andrew A. Mitchell, and Ida E. Berger. (1993). “A Framework for Understanding the Effects of Advertising Exposure on Choice.” In A.A. Mitchell (ed.),Advertising Exposure, Memory and Choice. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 89–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, Thomas P. (1993). “Log-Linear Trees: Models of Market Structure in Brand Switching Data,”Journal of Marketing Research 30 (August), 267–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedrick, James H., and Fred K. Zufryden. (1991). “Evaluating the Impact of Advertising Media Plans: A Model of Consumer Purchase Dynamics Using Single-Source Data,”Marketing Science 10 (Spring), 111–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raj, S.P. (1982). “The Effects of Advertising on High and Low Loyalty Consumer Segments,”Journal of Consumer Research 9 (June), 77–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, John H., and James M. Lattin. (1991). “Development and Testing of a Model of Consideration Set Formation,”Journal of Marketing Research 28 (November), 429–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonson, Itamar, and Russell S. Winer. (1992). “The Influence of Purchase Quantity and Display Format on Consumer Preference for Variety,”Journal of Consumer Research 19 (June), 133–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tellis, Gerard J. (1988). “Advertising Exposure, Loyalty, and Brand Purchase: A Two-Stage Model of Choice,”Journal of Marketing Research 25 (May), 134–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winer, Russell S. (1980). “Estimation of a Longitudinal Model to Decompose the Effects of an Advertising Stimulus on Family Consumption,”Management Science 26 (May), 471–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • --. (1994). “Using Single-Source Scanner Data as a Natural Experiment for Evaluating Advertising Effects,”Journal of Marketing Science (Japan), forthcoming.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Winer, R.S., Bucklin, R.E., Deighton, J. et al. When worlds collide: The implications of panel data-based choice models for consumer behavior. Market Lett 5, 383–394 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999212

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999212

Key words

Navigation