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

Beyond the Endogeneity Bias: The Effect of Unmeasured Brand Characteristics on Household-Level Brand Choice Models

  • Pradeep Chintagunta

    ()

    (Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, 5807 South Woodlawn Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

  • Jean-Pierre Dubé

    ()

    (Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, 5807 South Woodlawn Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

  • Khim Yong Goh

    ()

    (Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, 5807 South Woodlawn Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

We investigate the role of potential weekly brand-specific characteristics that influence consumer choices, but are unobserved or unmeasurable by the researcher. We use an empirical approach, based on the estimation methods used for standard random coefficients logit models, to account for the presence of such unobserved attributes. Using household scanner panel data, we find evidence that ignoring such time-varying latent (to the researcher) characteristics can lead to two types of problems. First, consistent with previous literature, we find that these unobserved characteristics may lead to biased estimates of the mean price response parameters. This argument is based on a form of price endogeneity. If marketing managers set prices based on consumer willingness to pay, then the observed prices will likely be correlated with the latent (to the researcher) brand characteristics. We resolve this problem by using an instrumental variables procedure. Our findings suggest that simply ignoring these attributes may also lead to larger estimates of the variance in the heterogeneity distribution of preferences and price sensitivities across households. This could overstate the benefits from marketing activities such as household-level targeting. We resolve the problem by using weekly brand intercepts, embedded in a random coefficients brand choice model, to control for weekly brand-specific characteristics, while accounting for household heterogeneity. Overall, our results extend the finding on the endogeneity bias from the mean of the heterogeneity distribution (i.e., the price effect) to include the variance of that distribution.

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/mnsc.1040.0323
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.

Volume (Year): 51 (2005)
Issue (Month): 5 (May)
Pages: 832-849

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:51:y:2005:i:5:p:832-849
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. Huber, Joel & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7zm4f51b, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  2. Nevo, Aviv, 1999. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt7cm5p858, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  3. C. Lanier Benkard & Patrick Bajari, 2004. "Demand Estimation with Heterogeneous Consumers and Unobserved Product Characteristics: A Hedonic Approach," NBER Working Papers 10278, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Russell S. Winer, 1999. "Endogeneity in Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(10), pages 1324-1338, October.
  5. 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.
  6. Richard W. Blundell & James L. Powell, 2004. "Endogeneity in Semiparametric Binary Response Models," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 71(3), pages 655-679.
  7. 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 310-27, July.
  8. Nitin Mehta & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 2003. "Price Uncertainty and Consumer Search: A Structural Model of Consideration Set Formation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 58-84, June.
  9. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
  10. Michaela Draganska & Dipak Jain, 2002. "Structural Models of Competitive Market Behavior: An Estimation Approach Using Disaggregate Data," Computing in Economics and Finance 2002 61, Society for Computational Economics.
  11. 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.
  12. Peter E. Rossi & Robert E. McCulloch & Greg M. Allenby, 1996. "The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 321-340.
  13. 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.
  14. Elrod, Terry & Keane, Michael, 1995. "A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data," MPRA Paper 52434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  15. Austan Goolsbee & Amil Petrin, 2004. "The Consumer Gains from Direct Broadcast Satellites and the Competition with Cable TV," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 351-381, 03.
  16. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-90, July.
  17. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
  18. 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.
  19. Bajari, Patrick & Benkard, C. Lanier, 2004. "Demand Estimation With Heterogeneous Consumers and Unobserved Product Characteristics: A Hedonic Approach," Research Papers 1842, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
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:ormnsc:v:51:y:2005:i:5:p:832-849. 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.