IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v45y1999i10p1324-1338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models

Author

Listed:
  • J. Miguel Villas-Boas

    (Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720)

  • Russell S. Winer

    (Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720)

Abstract

Applications of random utility models to scanner data have been widely presented in marketing for the last 20 years. One particular problem with these applications is that they have ignored possible correlations between the independent variables in the deterministic component of utility (price, promotion, etc.) and the stochastic component or error term. In fact, marketing-mix variables, such as price, not only affect brand purchasing probabilities but are themselves endogenously set by marketing managers. This work tests whether these endogeneity problems are important enough to warrant consideration when estimating random utility models with scanner panel data. Our results show that not accounting for endogeneity may result in a substantial bias in the parameter estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Russell S. Winer, 1999. "Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1324-1338, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:10:p:1324-1338
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.45.10.1324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.10.1324
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Newey, Whitney K., 1987. "Efficient estimation of limited dependent variable models with endogenous explanatory variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 231-250, November.
    2. Heckman, James J, 1978. "Dummy Endogenous Variables in a Simultaneous Equation System," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 931-959, July.
    3. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1986. "Price and Advertising Signals of Product Quality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 796-821, August.
    4. David Besanko & Sachin Gupta & Dipak Jain, 1998. "Logit Demand Estimation Under Competitive Pricing Behavior: An Equilibrium Framework," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-1), pages 1533-1547, November.
    5. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Dipak C. Jain, 1995. "Empirical Analysis of a Dynamic Duopoly Model of Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 109-131, March.
    6. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    7. Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain, 1993. "Simulation-based inference : A survey with special reference to panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1-2), pages 5-33, September.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Gerard J. Tellis & Fred S. Zufryden, 1995. "Tackling the Retailer Decision Maze: Which Brands to Discount, How Much, When and Why?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 271-299.
    11. 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.
    12. Peter S. Fader & James M. Lattin & John D. C. Little, 1992. "Estimating Nonlinear Parameters in the Multinomial Logit Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 372-385.
    13. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    14. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    15. 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.
    16. 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)

    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. Guhl, Daniel, 2019. "Addressing endogeneity in aggregate logit models with time-varying parameters for optimal retail-pricing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 684-698.
    2. 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.
    3. Pradeep Chintagunta & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Khim Yong Goh, 2005. "Beyond the Endogeneity Bias: The Effect of Unmeasured Brand Characteristics on Household-Level Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 832-849, May.
    4. Bonnet, Céline & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Models of Consumer Demand for Differentiated Products," TSE Working Papers 16-741, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Pradeep Chintagunta & Tülin Erdem & Peter E. Rossi & Michel Wedel, 2006. "Structural Modeling in Marketing: Review and Assessment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 604-616, 11-12.
    6. Harikesh Nair & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Pradeep Chintagunta, 2005. "Accounting for Primary and Secondary Demand Effects with Aggregate Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 444-460, November.
    7. Michaela Draganska & Dipak C. Jain, 2006. "Consumer Preferences and Product-Line Pricing Strategies: An Empirical Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 164-174, 03-04.
    8. Michaela Draganska & Dipak Jain, 2004. "A Likelihood Approach to Estimating Market Equilibrium Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 605-616, May.
    9. K. Sudhir, 2001. "Structural Analysis of Manufacturer Pricing in the Presence of a Strategic Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 244-264, October.
    10. Richards, Timothy J. & Gómez, Miguel I. & Pofahl, Geoffrey, 2012. "A Multiple-discrete/Continuous Model of Price Promotion," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 206-225.
    11. Hongmin Li & Woonghee Tim Huh, 2011. "Pricing Multiple Products with the Multinomial Logit and Nested Logit Models: Concavity and Implications," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 549-563, October.
    12. Jorge Silva-Risso & Irina Ionova, 2008. "—A Nested Logit Model of Product and Transaction-Type Choice for Planning Automakers' Pricing and Promotions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 545-566, 07-08.
    13. Jean-Pierre Dubé, 2004. "Multiple Discreteness and Product Differentiation: Demand for Carbonated Soft Drinks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 66-81, September.
    14. Sungho Park & Sachin Gupta, 2012. "Handling Endogenous Regressors by Joint Estimation Using Copulas," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 567-586, July.
    15. Vella, Francis & Verbeek, Marno, 1999. "Two-step estimation of panel data models with censored endogenous variables and selection bias," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 239-263, June.
    16. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Harikesh S. Nair, 2011. "Structural Workshop Paper --Discrete-Choice Models of Consumer Demand in Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 977-996, November.
    17. Zhang, Qin & Seetharaman, P.B. & Narasimhan, Chakravarthi, 2012. "The Indirect Impact of Price Deals on Households’ Purchase Decisions Through the Formation of Expected Future Prices," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 88-101.
    18. Baohong Sun, 2005. "Promotion Effect on Endogenous Consumption," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 430-443, July.
    19. David Besanko & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Sachin Gupta, 2003. "Competitive Price Discrimination Strategies in a Vertical Channel Using Aggregate Retail Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1121-1138, September.
    20. Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Panel data discrete choice models of consumer demand," Economics Papers 2013-W08, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:10:p:1324-1338. 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: (Matthew Walls). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.