IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/0960.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A new approach to estimating state dependence in consumers’ brand choices applied to 762 pharmaceutical markets

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This article shows how state dependence effects can be estimated for many markets and with few assumptions by using data on how the shares buying specific products differ between those who bought the same product on their latest purchase occasion and other consumers. Using as instrument information regarding which product was cheapest when consumers made their last purchase, I estimate that state dependence increases the probability that consumers will buy the product they bought the last time by 8 percentage points. This effect is larger for women and the elderly than for men and younger consumers. The state dependence effect is also larger for brand-names than for generic products, but not significantly related to number of previous purchases.

Suggested Citation

  • Granlund, David, 2019. "A new approach to estimating state dependence in consumers’ brand choices applied to 762 pharmaceutical markets," Umeå Economic Studies 960, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:umnees:0960
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usbe.umu.se/ues/ues960.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. K. Sudhir & Nathan Yang, 2014. "Exploiting the Choice-Consumption Mismatch: A New Approach to Disentangle State Dependence and Heterogeneity," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1941, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    2. Pei-Yu (Sharon) Chen & Lorin M. Hitt, 2002. "Measuring Switching Costs and the Determinants of Customer Retention in Internet-Enabled Businesses: A Study of the Online Brokerage Industry," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 255-274, September.
    3. Ching, Andrew T., 2010. "Consumer learning and heterogeneity: Dynamics of demand for prescription drugs after patent expiration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 619-638, November.
    4. Gregory S. Crawford & Matthew Shum, 2005. "Uncertainty and Learning in Pharmaceutical Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1137-1173, July.
    5. Keith M. Marzilli Ericson, 2014. "Consumer Inertia and Firm Pricing in the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Insurance Exchange," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 38-64, February.
    6. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Robert J. Gordon, 1996. "The Economics of New Goods," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bres96-1, March.
    7. Yeo, Jungwon & Miller, Daniel P., 2018. "Estimating switching costs with market share data: an application to Medicare Part D," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 459-501.
    8. Granlund, David & Sundström, David, 2018. "Physicians prescribing originals causes welfare losses," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 143-146.
    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. Coscelli, Andrea, 2000. "The Importance of Doctors' and Patients' Preferences in the Prescription Decision," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 349-369, September.
    11. Matthew Osborne, 2011. "Consumer learning, switching costs, and heterogeneity: A structural examination," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 25-70, March.
    12. 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.
    13. Toshiaki Iizuka, 2012. "Physician Agency and Adoption of Generic Pharmaceuticals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2826-2858, October.
    14. Benjamin R. Handel, 2013. "Adverse Selection and Inertia in Health Insurance Markets: When Nudging Hurts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2643-2682, December.
    15. 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)

    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. 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.
    2. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges and New Developments," Economics Papers 2013-W07, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    3. Janssen, Aljoscha & Granlund, David, 2023. "The importance of the first generic substitution: Evidence from Sweden," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 1-25.
    4. Michael Grubb, 2015. "Failing to Choose the Best Price: Theory, Evidence, and Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(3), pages 303-340, November.
    5. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Invited Paper ---Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges, and New Developments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 913-938, November.
    6. Arjen van Lin & Els Gijsbrechts, 2019. "“Hello Jumbo!” The Spatio-Temporal Rollout and Traffic to a New Grocery Chain After Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2388-2411, May.
    7. Michael P. Keane, 2013. "Panel data discrete choice models of consumer demand," Economics Papers 2013-W08, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    8. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. K. Sudhir & Nathan Yang, 2014. "Exploiting the Choice-Consumption Mismatch: A New Approach to Disentangle State Dependence and Heterogeneity," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1941, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    12. Keane, M.P. & Thorp, S., 2016. "Complex Decision Making," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 661-709, Elsevier.
    13. Michael P. Keane & Susan Thorp, 2016. "Complex Decision Making: The Roles of Cognitive Limitations, Cognitive Decline and Ageing," Economics Papers 2016-W10, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    14. Janssen, Aljoscha & Granlund, David, 2022. "The Importance of the First Generic Substitution: Evidence from Sweden," Working Paper Series 1428, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    15. Yeo, Jungwon & Miller, Daniel P., 2018. "Estimating switching costs with market share data: an application to Medicare Part D," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 459-501.
    16. Janssen, Aljoscha, 2020. "Switching Costs, Brand Premia and Behavioral Pricing in the Pharmaceutical Market," Working Paper Series 1317, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    17. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2019. "Dynamic Random Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(6), pages 1941-2002, November.
    18. Jie Bai, 2016. "Melons as Lemons: Asymmetric Information, Consumer Learning and Seller Reputation," Natural Field Experiments 00540, The Field Experiments Website.
    19. Andrew Ching & Susumu Imai & Masakazu Ishihara & Neelam Jain, 2012. "A practitioner’s guide to Bayesian estimation of discrete choice dynamic programming models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 151-196, June.
    20. Ching, Andrew T. & Erdem, Tülin & Keane, Michael P., 2014. "A simple method to estimate the roles of learning, inventories and category consideration in consumer choice," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 60-72.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Brand choice; Consumer dynamics; Drugs; Quasi-experiment econometrics; State dependence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:umnees:0960. 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: David Skog (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inumuse.html .

    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.