IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/sfb649/sfb649dp2005-028.html

A market basket analysis conducted with a multivariate logit model

Author

Listed:
  • Boztuğ, Yasemin
  • Hildebrandt, Lutz

Abstract

The following research is guided by the hypothesis that products chosen on a shopping trip in a supermarket can indicate the preference interdependencies between different products or brands. The bundle chosen on the trip can be regarded as the result of a global utility function. More specifically: the existence of such a function implies a cross-category dependence of brand choice behavior. It is hypothesized that the global utility function related to a product bundle results from the marketing-mix of the underlying brands. Several approaches exist to describe the choice of specific categories from a set of many alternatives. The models are discussed in brief; the multivariate logit approach is used to estimate a model with a German data set.

Suggested Citation

  • Boztuğ, Yasemin & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 2005. "A market basket analysis conducted with a multivariate logit model," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2005-028, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfb649:sfb649dp2005-028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/25047/1/496782525.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Puneet Manchanda & Asim Ansari & Sunil Gupta, 1999. "The “Shopping Basket”: A Model for Multicategory Purchase Incidence Decisions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 95-114.
    2. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-426, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Andrew Ainslie & Peter E. Rossi, 1998. "Similarities in Choice Behavior Across Product Categories," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 91-106.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, November.
    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. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2005-028 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Dannewald, Till & Kreis, Henning & Silberhorn, Nadja, 2007. "Das hybride Wahlmodell und seine Anwendung im Marketing," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2007-062, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    3. Bonnet, Céline & Richards, Timothy J., 2016. "Models of Consumer Demand for Differentiated Products," TSE Working Papers 16-741, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    4. Kim, Chul & Jun, Duk Bin & Park, Sungho, 2018. "Capturing flexible correlations in multiple-discrete choice outcomes using copulas," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 34-59.
    5. Richards, Timothy J. & Hamilton, Stephen F. & Yonezawa, Koichi, 2018. "Retail Market Power in a Shopping Basket Model of Supermarket Competition," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 328-342.
    6. Nitin Mehta, 2007. "Investigating Consumers' Purchase Incidence and Brand Choice Decisions Across Multiple Product Categories: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 196-217, 03-04.
    7. Joseph Pancras, 2010. "A Framework to Determine the Value of Consumer Consideration Set Information for Firm Pricing Strategies," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 269-300, March.
    8. Adam N. Smith & Stephan Seiler & Ishant Aggarwal, 2023. "Optimal Price Targeting," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(3), pages 476-499, May.
    9. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    11. Erik Stam & Roy Thurik & Peter van der Zwan, 2010. "Entrepreneurial exit in real and imagined markets," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(4), pages 1109-1139, August.
    12. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    13. Vanitha Swaminathan & Srinivas Reddy & Sara Dommer, 2012. "Spillover effects of ingredient branded strategies on brand choice: A field study," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 237-251, March.
    14. Aydın Alptekinoğlu & John H. Semple, 2016. "The Exponomial Choice Model: A New Alternative for Assortment and Price Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 79-93, February.
    15. Jumbe, Charles B.L. & Angelsen, Arild, 2011. "Modeling choice of fuelwood source among rural households in Malawi: A multinomial probit analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 732-738, September.
    16. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    17. Friederike Paetz & Winfried J. Steiner, 2017. "The benefits of incorporating utility dependencies in finite mixture probit models," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 39(3), pages 793-819, July.
    18. Hongshen Sun & Juanjuan Zhang, 2025. "From Model Choice to Model Belief: Establishing a New Measure for LLM-Based Research," Papers 2512.23184, arXiv.org.
    19. Guyt, Jonne & Gijsbrechts, Els, 2018. "On consumer choice patterns and the net impact of feature promotions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 490-508.
    20. Christine Atteneder & Martin Halla, 2006. "Bargaining at divorce: The allocation of custody," Economics working papers 2006-18, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria, revised Jan 2007.
    21. Andrew T. Ching & Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 2020. "How much do consumers know about the quality of products? Evidence from the diaper market," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 541-569, October.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:sfb649:sfb649dp2005-028. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sohubde.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.