IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

How Peer Influence Affects Attribute Preferences: A Bayesian Updating Mechanism

  • Vishal Narayan

    ()

    (Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

  • Vithala R. Rao

    ()

    (Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

  • Carolyne Saunders

    ()

    (Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

Registered author(s):

    We study how multiattribute product choices are affected by peer influence. We propose a two-stage conjoint-based approach to examine three behavioral mechanisms of peer influence. We find that when faced with information on peer choices, consumers update their attribute preferences in a Bayesian manner. This suggests that greater uncertainty in the attribute preferences of a focal consumer and lesser uncertainty in preferences of peers both lead to greater preference revision. Greater number of peers is associated with greater preference revision, although the extent of preference revision diminishes with increasing number of peers. Furthermore, to address the significant time and costs associated with collecting sociometric data, we estimate the accuracy of predicted consumer choices when peer influence data are unavailable. Online social network membership and frequency of peer interactions provide better proxies than more common demographic similarity measures. These findings have key implications, especially for word-of-mouth marketing.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1100.0618
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Marketing Science.

    Volume (Year): 30 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 2 (03-04)
    Pages: 368-384

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:30:y:2011:i:2:p:368-384
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

    Phone: +1-443-757-3500
    Fax: 443-757-3515
    Web page: http://www.informs.org/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Sridhar Narayanan & Puneet Manchanda, 2009. "Heterogeneous Learning and the Targeting of Marketing Communication for New Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 424-441, 05-06.
    2. Calvó-Armengol, Antoni & Patacchini, Eleonora & Zenou, Yves, 2008. "Peer Effects and Social Networks in Education," CEPR Discussion Papers 7060, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Anocha Aribarg & Neeraj Arora & Moon Young Kang, 2010. "Predicting Joint Choice Using Individual Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 139-157, 01-02.
    4. 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.
    5. Puneet Manchanda & Ying Xie & Nara Youn, 2008. "The Role of Targeted Communication and Contagion in Product Adoption," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 961-976, 11-12.
    6. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger, 1995. "Attribute Importance Weights Modification in Assessing a Brand's Competitive Potential," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 253-270.
    7. Sha Yang & Vishal Narayan & Henry Assael, 2006. "Estimating the Interdependence of Television Program Viewership Between Spouses: A Bayesian Simultaneous Equation Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 336-349, July.
    8. Uma R. Karmarkar & Zakary L. Tormala, 2010. "Believe Me, I Have No Idea What I'm Talking About: The Effects of Source Certainty on Consumer Involvement and Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(6), pages 1033-1049, 04.
    9. Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2004. "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 391-406, October.
    10. John H. Roberts & Glen L. Urban, 1988. "Modeling Multiattribute Utility, Risk, and Belief Dynamics for New Consumer Durable Brand Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 167-185, February.
    11. Bruce Sacerdote, 2001. "Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth Roommates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(2), pages 681-704.
    12. Corfman, Kim P & Lehmann, Donald R, 1987. " Models of Cooperative Group Decision-Making and Relative Influence: An Experimental Investigation of Family Purchase Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, June.
    13. Brent McFerran & Darren W. Dahl & Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Andrea C. Morales, 2010. "I'll Have What She's Having: Effects of Social Influence and Body Type on the Food Choices of Others," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(6), pages 915-929, 04.
    14. Wesley R. Hartmann, 2010. "Demand Estimation with Social Interactions and the Implications for Targeted Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 585-601, 07-08.
    15. Raghuram Iyengar & Christophe Van den Bulte & Thomas W. Valente, 2011. "Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 195-212, 03-04.
    16. David Bell & Sangyoung Song, 2007. "Neighborhood effects and trial on the internet: Evidence from online grocery retailing," Quantitative Marketing and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 361-400, December.
    17. Rao, Vithala R & Steckel, Joel H, 1991. " A Polarization Model for Describing Group Preferences," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 108-18, June.
    18. Jacoby, Jacob, et al, 1994. " Tracing the Impact of Item-by-Item Information Accessing on Uncertainty Reduction," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 291-303, September.
    19. David Godes & Dina Mayzlin, 2009. "Firm-Created Word-of-Mouth Communication: Evidence from a Field Test," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 721-739, 07-08.
    20. Wesley Hartmann & Puneet Manchanda & Harikesh Nair & Matthew Bothner & Peter Dodds & David Godes & Kartik Hosanagar & Catherine Tucker, 2008. "Modeling social interactions: Identification, empirical methods and policy implications," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 287-304, December.
    21. Childers, Terry L & Rao, Akshay R, 1992. " The Influence of Familial and Peer-Based Reference Groups on Consumer Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 198-211, September.
    22. Tülin Erdem, 1996. "A Dynamic Analysis of Market Structure Based on Panel Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 359-378.
    23. Kahn, Barbara E & Meyer, Robert J, 1991. " Consumer Multiattribute Judgments under Attribute-Weight Uncertainity," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 508-22, March.
    24. Kahn, Barbara E & Sarin, Rakesh K, 1988. " Modeling Ambiguity in Decisions under Uncertainty," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 265-72, September.
    25. Bearden, William O & Etzel, Michael J, 1982. " Reference Group Influence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 183-94, September.
    26. Jonah Berger & Chip Heath, 2007. "Where Consumers Diverge from Others: Identity Signaling and Product Domains," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 121-134, 06.
    27. Jan Kratzer & Christopher Lettl, 2009. "Distinctive Roles of Lead Users and Opinion Leaders in the Social Networks of Schoolchildren," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(4), pages 646-659, December.
    28. Oded Netzer & Olivier Toubia & Eric Bradlow & Ely Dahan & Theodoros Evgeniou & Fred Feinberg & Eleanor Feit & Sam Hui & Joseph Johnson & John Liechty & James Orlin & Vithala Rao, 2008. "Beyond conjoint analysis: Advances in preference measurement," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 337-354, December.
    29. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:30:y:2011:i:2:p:368-384. 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: (Mirko Janc)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.