IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v51y2001i2p115-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Random utility models in marketing research: a survey

Author

Listed:
  • Baltas, George
  • Doyle, Peter

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:51:y:2001:i:2:p:115-125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148-2963(99)00058-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. 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.
    2. Jeongwen Chiang, 1991. "A Simultaneous Approach to the Whether, What and How Much to Buy Questions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 297-315.
    3. Chakraborty, Goutam & Woodworth, George & Gaeth, Gary J. & Ettenson, Richard, 1992. "Screening for interactions between design factors and demographics in choice-based conjoint," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 115-133, March.
    4. James M. Lattin, 1987. "A Model of Balanced Choice Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 48-65.
    5. Heckman, James & Singer, Burton, 1984. "A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 271-320, March.
    6. Wagner A. Kamakura & Rajendra K. Srivastava, 1986. "An Ideal-Point Probabilistic Choice Model for Heterogeneous Preferences," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 199-218.
    7. J. Morgan Jones & Jane T. Landwehr, 1988. "Removing Heterogeneity Bias from Logit Model Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 41-59.
    8. Louviere, Jordan J., 1992. "Experimental choice analysis: Introduction and overview," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 89-95, March.
    9. Füsun Gönül & Kannan Srinivasan, 1993. "Modeling Multiple Sources of Heterogeneity in Multinomial Logit Models: Methodological and Managerial Issues," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 213-229.
    10. Kim, Byung-Do & Blattberg, Robert C & Rossi, Peter E, 1995. "Modeling the Distribution of Price Sensitivity and Implications for Optimal Retail Pricing," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(3), pages 291-303, July.
    11. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    12. Hausman, Jerry A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1987. "Specifying and testing econometric models for rank-ordered data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-2), pages 83-104.
    13. Buckley, Patrick G., 1988. "Nested multinomial logit analysis of scanner data for a hierarchical choice model," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 133-154, September.
    14. Bhat, Chandra R., 1995. "A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 471-483, December.
    15. Greg M. Allenby & Peter E. Rossi, 1991. "Quality Perceptions and Asymmetric Switching Between Brands," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 185-204.
    16. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    17. Rishin Roy & Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Sudeep Haldar, 1996. "A Framework for Investigating Habits, “The Hand of the Past,” and Heterogeneity in Dynamic Brand Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 280-299.
    18. Weeks, Melvyn, 1997. " The Multinomial Probit Model Revisited: A Discussion of Parameter Estimability, Identification and Specification Testing," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 297-320, September.
    19. Dennis H. Gensch, 1987. "A Two-Stage Disaggregate Attribute Choice Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 223-239.
    20. Steckel, Joel H & Vanhonacker, Wilfried R, 1988. "A Heterogeneous Conditional Logit Model of Choice," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 6(3), pages 391-398, July.
    21. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. " An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    22. 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.
    23. Allenby, Greg M & Lenk, Peter J, 1995. "Reassessing Brand Loyalty, Price Sensitivity, and Merchandising Effects on Consumer Brand Choice," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(3), pages 281-289, July.
    24. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    25. McCulloch, Robert & Rossi, Peter E., 1994. "An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-2), pages 207-240.
    26. 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.
    27. Keane, Michael, 1997. "Current Issues in Discrete Choice Modeling," MPRA Paper 52515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    28. P. K. Kannan & Gordon P. Wright, 1991. "Modeling and Testing Structured Markets: A Nested Logit Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 58-82.
    29. Lakshman Krishnamurthi & S. P. Raj, 1988. "A Model of Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Price Sensitivities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20.
    30. Bruce G. S. Hardie & Eric J. Johnson & Peter S. Fader, 1993. "Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 378-394.
    31. Bart J. Bronnenberg & Luc Wathieu, 1996. "Asymmetric Promotion Effects and Brand Positioning," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 379-394.
    32. Ben-Akiva, Moshe & Morikawa, Takayuki & Shiroishi, Fumiaki, 1992. "Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 149-164, March.
    33. Hensher, David A, 1984. "Achieving Representativeness of the Observable Component of the Indirect Utility Function in Logit Choice Models: An Empirical Revelation," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(2), pages 265-280, April.
    34. Purushottam Papatla & Lakshman Krishnamurthi, 1992. "A Probit Model of Choice Dynamics," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 189-206.
    35. Peter S. Fader & James M. Lattin, 1993. "Accounting for Heterogeneity and Nonstationarity in a Cross-Sectional Model of Consumer Purchase Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 304-317.
    36. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    37. Tülin Erdem, 1996. "A Dynamic Analysis of Market Structure Based on Panel Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 359-378.
    38. Winer, Russell S, 1986. " A Reference Price Model of Brand Choice for Frequently Purchased Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 250-256, September.
    39. Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 1992. "Estimating a Multinomial Probit Model of Brand Choice Using the Method of Simulated Moments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 386-407.
    40. Louviere, Jordan J & Hensher, David A, 1983. " Using Discrete Choice Models with Experimental Design Data to Forecast Consumer Demand for a Unique Cultural Event," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 348-361, December.
    41. George R. Parsons & Mary Jo Kealy, 1992. "Randomly Drawn Opportunity Sets in a Random Utility Model of Lake Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(1), pages 93-106.
    42. Gary Chamberlain, 1980. "Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 225-238.
    43. Hajivassiliou, Vassilis & McFadden, Daniel & Ruud, Paul, 1996. "Simulation of multivariate normal rectangle probabilities and their derivatives theoretical and computational results," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1-2), pages 85-134.
    44. Jeffrey A. Dubin, 1986. "A Nested Logit Model of Space and Water Heat System Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 112-124.
    45. Wagner A. Kamakura & Byung-Do Kim & Jonathan Lee, 1996. "Modeling Preference and Structural Heterogeneity in Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 152-172.
    46. 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. Johannes Reichl & Sylvia Frühwirth-Schnatter, 2012. "A censored random coefficients model for the detection of zero willingness to pay," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 259-281, June.
    2. Linda Court Salisbury & Fred M. Feinberg, 2010. "Alleviating the Constant Stochastic Variance Assumption in Decision Research: Theory, Measurement, and Experimental Test," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 1-17, 01-02.
    3. Emmanouilides, Christos J. & Davies, Richard B., 2007. "Modelling and estimation of social interaction effects in new product diffusion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 1253-1274, March.
    4. A. Prinzie & D. Van Den Poel, 2007. "Random Forrests for Multiclass classification: Random Multinomial Logit," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 07/435, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    5. M. Girotti & R. Meade, 2017. "U.S. Savings Banks' Demutualization and Depositor Welfare," Working papers 639, Banque de France.
    6. Martine AUDIBERT & Yong HE & Jacky MATHONNAT, 2017. "What does demand heterogeneity tell us about health care provider choice in rural China?," Working Papers P193, FERDI.
    7. Jacky MATHONNAT & Yong HE & Martine AUDIBERT, 2013. "Two-Period Comparison of Healthcare Demand with Income Growth and Population Aging in Rural China: Implications for Adjustment of the Healthcare Supply and Development," Working Papers 201315, CERDI.
    8. Baltas, George, 2004. "A model for multiple brand choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 144-149, April.
    9. repec:pal:jorsoc:v:56:y:2005:i:11:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601972 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:eee:tefoso:v:120:y:2017:i:c:p:284-297 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Olga Novikova & Dmitriy B. Potapov, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Consumer Purchase Behavior: Interaction between State Dependence and Sensitivity to Marketing-Mix Variables," HSE Working papers WP BRP 48/MAN/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    12. Carson, Richard T. & Louviere, Jordan J., 2014. "Statistical properties of consideration sets," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 37-48.
    13. J.S. Cramer, 2005. "Omitted Variables and Misspecified Disturbances in the Logit Model," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-084/4, Tinbergen Institute.
    14. Anand, P.B., 2001. "Consumer Preferences for Water Supply? An Application of Choice Models to Urban India," WIDER Working Paper Series 145, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    15. Diiro, Gracious M. & Ker, Alan P. & San, Abdul G., 2015. "The role of gender in fertiliser adoption in Uganda," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(2), June.
    16. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & van Mossel, Allard & Broecks, Kevin P.F., 2015. "Public acceptance of energy technologies: The effects of labeling, time, and heterogeneity in a discrete choice experiment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 817-829.
    17. repec:eee:reensy:v:108:y:2012:i:c:p:77-89 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Jean-Paul Doignon & Aleksandar Pekeč & Michel Regenwetter, 2004. "The repeated insertion model for rankings: Missing link between two subset choice models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 33-54, March.
    19. Martine AUDIBERT & Yong HE & Jacky MATHONNAT, 2017. "What does demand heterogeneity tell us about health care provider choice in rural China?," Working Papers P193, FERDI.
    20. Baltas, George & Saridakis, Charalampos, 2013. "An empirical investigation of the impact of behavioural and psychographic consumer characteristics on car preferences: An integrated model of car type choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 92-110.
    21. Martine Audibert & Yong He & Jacky Mathonnat, 2013. "Multinomial and Mixed Logit Modeling in the Presence of Heterogeneity: A Two-Period Comparison of Healthcare Provider Choice in Rural China," Working Papers halshs-00846085, HAL.
    22. Tsai, Rung-Ching & Bockenholt, Ulf, 2002. "Two-level linear paired comparison models: estimation and identifiability issues," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 429-449, July.
    23. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Dekker, Thijs, 2014. "Random regret minimization for consumer choice modeling: Assessment of empirical evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2428-2436.
    24. Marine Le Gall-Ely, 2009. "Définition, mesure et déterminants du consentement à payer du consommateur : synthèse critique et voies de recherche," Post-Print hal-00522826, HAL.
    25. A. Prinzie & D. Van Den Poel, 2006. "Exploiting Randomness for Feature Selection in Multinomial Logit: a CRM Cross-Sell Application," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/390, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:51:y:2001:i:2:p:115-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.