IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2597-d336775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining Consumer Heterogeneity in Structural State-Dependence

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoyuan Wang

    (School of Management and Economics, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China)

  • Yan Liu

    (School of Public Affairs and Administration, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China)

Abstract

Consumers are heterogeneous in their inertial responses to previous consumptions. Information on consumers’ structural state-dependence is valuable for evaluating consumers’ habit-forming strength and thus can be used for encouraging more sustainable consumption. Conventional methods of estimating such effects are complex and require repeated purchase data, which is difficult to obtain when consumers are inexperienced in buying sustainable products. In this paper, we utilize consumers’ previous switch behaviour data and investigate whether it can explain heterogeneous state-dependence effects. We demonstrate this in consumer-packaged goods markets using scanner datasets. Consumers’ normalized brand switches in a different product category several years ago are used to measure inter-temporal preference variations that are stable and are independent of products and markets. Accounting for household characteristics, we find that some variation in switch behaviour is highly stable: it explains a significant portion of consumers’ structural state-dependence in the market under investigation. Therefore, consumers’ switch tendencies can be structural to their preference. The finding suggests that incorporating consumers’ switch behaviour from other choice domains can be a simple and effective method of understanding the heterogeneous effects behind habit formation. Our constructed measure has broad implications in shifting consumer behaviour to be more sustainable.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoyuan Wang & Yan Liu, 2020. "Explaining Consumer Heterogeneity in Structural State-Dependence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2597-:d:336775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2597/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2597/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    4. Gerald Häubl & Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Bas Donkers, 2010. "Tunnel Vision: Local Behavioral Influences on Consumer Decisions in Product Search," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 438-455, 05-06.
    5. Tiziana de-Magistris & Azucena Gracia & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2013. "On the Use of Honesty Priming Tasks to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1136-1154.
    6. Wuepper, David & Clemm, Alexandra & Wree, Philipp, 2019. "The preference for sustainable coffee and a new approach for dealing with hypothetical bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 475-486.
    7. Klaus Wertenbroch, 1998. "Consumption Self-Control by Rationing Purchase Quantities of Virtue and Vice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 317-337.
    8. Bas Verplanken, 2018. "Promoting Sustainability: Towards a Segmentation Model of Individual and Household Behaviour and Behaviour Change," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 193-205, May.
    9. Jean‐Pierre Dubé & Günter J. Hitsch & Peter E. Rossi, 2010. "State dependence and alternative explanations for consumer inertia," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 417-445, September.
    10. Tim Kurz & Benjamin Gardner & Bas Verplanken & Charles Abraham, 2015. "Habitual behaviors or patterns of practice? Explaining and changing repetitive climate‐relevant actions," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 113-128, January.
    11. McAlister, Leigh & Pessemier, Edgar, 1982. "Variety Seeking Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Review," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(3), pages 311-322, December.
    12. Martijn G. de Jong & Donald R. Lehmann & Oded Netzer, 2012. "State-Dependence Effects in Surveys," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 838-854, September.
    13. P. B. Seetharaman, 2004. "Modeling Multiple Sources of State Dependence in Random Utility Models: A Distributed Lag Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 263-271, April.
    14. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Allenby, Greg M. & Rossi, Peter E., 1998. "Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 57-78, November.
    16. James J. Heckman, 1981. "Heterogeneity and State Dependence," NBER Chapters, in: Studies in Labor Markets, pages 91-140, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Xuepin Wu & Jiru Han, 2021. "Psychological Needs, Physiological Needs and Regional Comparison Effects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.

    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. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2019. "Dynamic Random Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(6), pages 1941-2002, November.
    2. David Granlund, 2021. "A New Approach to Estimating State Dependence in Consumers’ Brand Choices Applied to 762 Pharmaceutical Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(2), pages 443-483, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Hong, Seung-Hyun & Rezende, Leonardo, 2012. "Lock-in and unobserved preferences in server operating systems: A case of Linux vs. Windows," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 167(2), pages 494-503.
    5. 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.
    6. Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Panel data discrete choice models of consumer demand," Economics Papers 2013-W08, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    7. Okamura, Kazuaki & Islam, Nizamul, 2021. "Multinomial employment dynamics with state dependence and heterogeneity: Evidence from Japan," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    8. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    9. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Timothy J. Richards & Jura Liaukonytė, 2023. "Switching cost and store choice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 195-218, January.
    11. Jay Pil Choi & Seung-Hyun Hong & Seonghoon Jeon, 2013. "Local Identity and Persistent Leadership in Market Share Dynamics: Evidence from Deregulation in the Korean Soju Industry," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 29, pages 267-304.
    12. 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.
    13. Martijn G. de Jong & Donald R. Lehmann & Oded Netzer, 2012. "State-Dependence Effects in Surveys," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 838-854, September.
    14. Jean‐Pierre Dubé & Günter J. Hitsch & Peter E. Rossi, 2010. "State dependence and alternative explanations for consumer inertia," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 417-445, September.
    15. Cleeren, Kathleen & Geyskens, Kelly & Verhoef, Peter C. & Pennings, Joost M.E., 2016. "Regular or low-fat? An investigation of the long-run impact of the first low-fat purchase on subsequent purchase volumes and calories," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 896-906.
    16. Ito, Yuki & Hara, Konan & Kobayashi, Yasuki, 2020. "The effect of inertia on brand-name versus generic drug choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 364-379.
    17. Victor Aguirregabiria & Jesus Carro, 2021. "Identification of Average Marginal Effects in Fixed Effects Dynamic Discrete Choice Models," Working Papers tecipa-701, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    18. Békési, Dániel & Loy, Jens-Peter & Weiss, Christoph, 2013. "State Dependence and Preference Heterogeneity: The Hand of the Past on Breakfast Cereal Consumption," 87th Annual Conference, April 8-10, 2013, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 158699, Agricultural Economics Society.
    19. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. John C. Whitehead & Daniel K. Lew, 2020. "Estimating recreation benefits through joint estimation of revealed and stated preference discrete choice data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2009-2029, April.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2597-:d:336775. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.