IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v20y1999i5p241-257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The substitutability of brands

Author

Listed:
  • Gordon R. Foxall

    (Departments of Management and Psychology, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK)

Abstract

A behavior analytical interpretation of consumer brand choice is proposed. The brands studied are of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) which are functionally substitutable but differentiated by marketing activity ('branding'). If functional equivalence was the sole basis of brand substitutability, consumers would either practice single brand purchasing or allocate purchases approximately indifferently (and approximately equally) among competing brands. Brand shares would tend at equilibrium toward equal size. But consumers typically buy several brands of those available, while brand shares vary markedly. The observed patterns of consumer choice are consistent with the predictions of matching theory if brands are assumed to be imperfect substitutes that provide qualitatively different reinforcers. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Gordon R. Foxall, 1999. "The substitutability of brands," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(5), pages 241-257.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:20:y:1999:i:5:p:241-257
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1468(199908)20:5<241::AID-MDE936>3.0.CO;2-U
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kagel,John H. & Battalio,Raymond C. & Green,Leonard, 2007. "Economic Choice Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521035927.
    2. Raymond Battalio & Leonard Green & John Kagel, 1995. "Economic choice theory. an experimental analysis of animal behavior," Framed Field Experiments 00166, The Field Experiments Website.
    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. Chaudhuri, Arjun & Ligas, Mark, 2009. "Consequences of Value in Retail Markets," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 406-419.
    2. Ehrenberg, Andrew S. C. & Uncles, Mark D. & Goodhardt, Gerald J., 2004. "Understanding brand performance measures: using Dirichlet benchmarks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(12), pages 1307-1325, December.
    3. Jorge M. Oliveira-Castro & Gordon R. Foxall & Victoria K. James, 2008. "Individual differences in price responsiveness within and across food brands," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(6), pages 733-753, July.
    4. Foxall, Gordon R. & Schrezenmaier, Teresa C., 2003. "The behavioral economics of consumer brand choice: Establishing a methodology," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 675-695, October.
    5. Jorge M. Oliveira-Castro & Gordon R. Foxall & Victoria K. James & Roberta H.B.F. Pohl & Moema B. Dias & Shing W. Chang, 2008. "Consumer-based brand equity and brand performance," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(4), pages 445-461, May.
    6. George Baltas, 2002. "An applied analysis of brand demand structure," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(9), pages 1171-1175.
    7. Rafael Barreiros Porto & Jorge Mendes de Oliveira-Castro & Diogo Conque Seco-Ferreira, 2010. "What consumers say and do: planned and actual amounts bought in relation to brand benefits," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(15), pages 2559-2570, September.

    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. Douglas D. Davis & Edward L. Millner, 2005. "Rebates, Matches, and Consumer Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(2), pages 410-421, October.
    2. Philippe Février & Michael Visser, 2004. "A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 93-114, February.
    3. Jeffrey K. Sarbaum & Solomon W. Polachek & Norman E. Spear, 1999. "The Effects of Price Changes on Alcohol Consumption in Alcohol-Experienced Rats," NBER Chapters, in: The Economic Analysis of Substance Use and Abuse: An Integration of Econometric and Behavioral Economic Research, pages 75-102, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Elias Khalil, 2009. "Natural selection and rational decision: two concepts of optimization," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 417-435, June.
    5. George Loewenstein, 2000. "Emotions in Economic Theory and Economic Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 426-432, May.
    6. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    7. Allen, Roy & Dziewulski, Paweł & Rehbeck, John, 2022. "Making sense of monkey business: Re-examining tests of animal rationality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 220-228.
    8. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    9. A. Shorrocks & T. Hens & H. Gottinger & S. Reichelstein & B. Kuon & M. Frenkel & R. Braun & R. Noll & Y. Xu, 1997. "Book Reviews," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 308-328, October.
    10. William T. Harbaugh & Kate Krause & Timothy R. Berry, 2001. "GARP for Kids: On the Development of Rational Choice Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1539-1545, December.
    11. M. Keith Chen & Venkat Lakshminarayanan & Laurie Santos, 2005. "The Evolution of Our Preferences: Evidence from Capuchin-Monkey Trading Behavior," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1524, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    12. Carlier, Alexis & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Directly Valuing Animal Welfare in (Environmental) Economics," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 14(1), pages 113-152, April.
    13. Foxall, Gordon R., 2003. "The behavior analysis of consumer choice: An introduction to the special issue," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 581-588, October.
    14. Smith, Trenton G, 2002. "Obesity and Nature's Thumbprint: How Modern Waistlines Can Inform Economic Theory," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt31g1m028, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    15. Hans-Werner Sinn, 2003. "Weber's Law and the Biological Evolution of Risk Preferences: The Selective Dominance of the Logarithmic Utility Function, 2002 Geneva Risk Lecture," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 28(2), pages 87-100, December.
    16. Conover, Kent L. & Shizgal, Peter, 2005. "Employing labor-supply theory to measure the reward value of electrical brain stimulation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 283-304, August.
    17. Harris Schlesinger, 2003. "Some Remarks on the Evolution of Risk Preferences," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 28(2), pages 101-104, December.
    18. Myerson, Joel & Green, Leonard & Scott Hanson, J. & Holt, Daniel D. & Estle, Sara J., 2003. "Discounting delayed and probabilistic rewards: Processes and traits," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 619-635, October.
    19. Rebecca Brana Solomon & Kent Conover & Peter Shizgal, 2017. "Valuation of opportunity costs by rats working for rewarding electrical brain stimulation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-40, August.
    20. M. Keith Chen & Venkat Lakshminarayanan & Laurie R. Santos, 2006. "How Basic Are Behavioral Biases? Evidence from Capuchin Monkey Trading Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(3), pages 517-537, June.

    More about this item

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:20:y:1999:i:5:p:241-257. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.