The author develops and describes latent class models useful for the analysis of behavioral hierarchies. The latent class models investigated are generalizations of the Guttman scale model and consider probabilistic relationships of item response to scale type and multiple hierarchical orderings of item responses. In addition, the author develops models for hierarchies that are present at the level of sets of items rather than at the level of individual items. He calls them “characteristics models” and examines their relationship to models for hierarchies of items. The models are illustrated on consumer complaint data gathered from a cross-sectional survey.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeardenWilliam O. and TeelJesse E. (1983), “Selected Determinants of Consumer Satisfaction and Complaint Reports,” Journal of Marketing Research, 20 (February), 21–8.
2.
ClarkYvonne and SoutarGeoffrey N. (1982), “Consumer Acquisition Patterns for Durable Goods: Australian Evidence,” Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (March), 456–60.
3.
CloggClifford C. (1977), “Unrestricted and Restricted Maximum Likelihood Latent Structure Analysis: A Manual for Users,” Working Paper 1977–09. University Park, PA: Population Issues Research Office, Pennsylvania State University.
4.
CloggClifford C. (1981), “New Developments in Latent Structure Analysis,” in Factor Analysis and Measurement in Sociological Research, JacksonD. M. and BorgattaE. F., eds. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 215–46.
5.
CloggClifford C. (1985), “Some Statistical Models for Analyzing Why Surveys Disagree,” in Surveying Subjective Phenomena, Vol. 2, TurnerC. F. and MartinE., eds. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
6.
CloggClifford C. and MunchJames M. (1984), “Using Simultaneous Latent Structure Models to Analyze Group Differences: Exploratory Analysis of Buying Style Items,” Journal of Business Research, 12 (September), 319–36.
7.
CloggClifford C. and SawyerDarwin O. (1981), “A Comparison of Alternative Models for Analyzing the Scalability of Response Patterns,” in Sociology Methodology 1981, LeinhardtS., ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 240–80.
8.
DayRalph L. and AshStephen B. (1979), “Consumer Response to Dissatisfaction with Durable Products,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 6, WilkieWilliam L., ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 438–44.
9.
DayRalph L. and LandonE. Laird (1977), “Toward a Theory of Consumer Complaining Behavior,” in Foundations of Consumer and Industrial Buying Behavior, WoodsideArch, ShethJagdish, and BennettPeter, eds. New York: American Elsevier, 425–37.
10.
DayRalph L., SchaetzleThomas, GrabickeKlaus, and StaubackFritz (1981), “The Hidden Agenda of Consumer Complaining,” Journal of Retailing, 57 (Fall), 86–106.
11.
DaytonC. Michael and MacreadyGeorge B. (1980), “A Scaling Model with Response Errors and Intrinsically Unscalable Respondents,” Psychometrika, 45 (September), 343–56.
12.
DicksonPeter R., LuschRobert F., and WilkieWilliam L. (1983), “Consumer Acquisition Priorities for Home Appliances: A Replication and Re-evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (March), 432–5.
13.
DillonWilliam R., MaddenThomas J., and MulaniNarendra (1983), “Scaling Models for Categorical Data: An Application of Latent Structure Models,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September), 209–24.
14.
EverittB. S. and HandD. J. (1981), Finite Mixture Distributions.London: Chapman and Hall.
15.
FeickLawrence F. (1984), “Analyzing Marketing Research Data With Association Models,” Journal of Marketing Research, 21 (November), 376–86.
16.
GoodmanLeo A. (1972), “A Modified Multiple Regression Approach to the Analysis of Dichotomous Variables,” American Sociological Review, 37 (February), 28–46.
17.
GoodmanLeo A. (1974), “Exploratory Latent Structure Analysis Using Both Identifiable and Unidentifiable Models,” Biometrika, 61 (2), 215–31.
18.
GoodmanLeo A. (1975), “A New Model for Scaling Response Patterns: An Application of the Quasi-Independence Concept,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70 (December), 755–68.
19.
GoodmanLeo A. (1979), “Simple Models for the Analysis of Association in Cross-Classifications Having Ordered Categories,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74 (September), 537–52.
20.
GreenPaul E., CarmoneF. J., and WachspressD. P. (1976), “Consumer Segmentation via Latent Structure Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (December), 170–4.
21.
GroverRajiv and DillonWilliam R. (1985), “A Probabilistic Model for Testing Hypothesized Hierarchical Market Structures,” Marketing Science, 4 (Fall), 312–35.
22.
GuttmanLouis (1950), “The Basis for Scalogram Analysis,” in Measurement and Prediction: Studies in Social Psychology in World War II, Vol. 4, StoufferS. A., eds. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 60–90.
23.
HauserJohn R. and UrbanGlen L. (1986), “The Value Priority Hypothesis for Consumer Budget Plans,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (March), 446–62.
24.
KasulisJack J., LuschRobert F., and StaffordEdward F.Jr. (1979), “Consumer Acquisition Patterns for Durable Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 6 (June), 47–57.
25.
LazarsfeldPaul A. (1950), “The Logical and Mathematical Foundation of Latent Structure Analysis,” in Measurement and Prediction: Studies in Social Psychology in World War II, Vol. 4, StoufferS. A., eds. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 362–411.
26.
LazarsfeldPaul A. and HenryNeil W. (1968), Latent Structure Analysis.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company.
27.
LuschRobert F., StaffordEdward F.Jr., and KasulisJack J. (1978), “Durable Accumulation: An Examination of Priority Patterns,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 5, HuntH. Keith, ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 119–25.
28.
MacreadyGeorge B. (1982), “The Use of Latent Class Models for Assessing Prerequisite Relations and Transference Among Traits,” Psychometrika, 47 (December), 477–88.
29.
MaddenThomas J. and DillonWilliam R. (1982), “Causal Analysis and Latent Class Models: An Application to a Communication Hierarchy of Effects Model,” Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (November), 472–90.
30.
MayoMichael C. and QuailsWilliam J. (1987), “Household Durable Goods Acquisition Behavior: A Longitudinal Study,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 14, AndersonPaul and WallendorfMelanie, eds. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
31.
McFallJohn (1969), “Priority Patterns and Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Marketing, 33 (October), 50–5.
32.
MooreDan E. and IshlerAnn S. (1980), Pennsylvania: The Citizens Viewpoint.University Park, PA: Cooperative Extension Service, Pennsylvania State University.
33.
MyersJohn G. and NicosiaFrancesco M. (1968), “New Empirial Directions in Market Segmentation: Latent Structure Models,” in Changing Marketing Systems: Consumer, Corporate, and Government Interfocus, MoyerReed, ed. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 247–52.
34.
ParoushJacob (1965), “The Order of Acquisition of Consumer Durables,” Econometrica, 33 (January), 225–35.
35.
PriceLewis C., DaytonC. Mitchell, and MacreadyGeorge B. (1980), “Discovery Algorithms for Hierarchical Relations Learning Models,” Psychometrika, 45 (December), 449–65.
36.
ProctorC. H. (1970), “A Probabilistic Formulation and Statistical Analysis of Guttman Scaling,” Psychometrika, 35 (March), 73–8.
37.
PyattF. Graham (1964), Priority Patterns and the Demand for Household Durable Goods.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38.
RindskopfDavid (1983), “A General Framework for Using Latent Class Analysis to Test Hierarchical and Nonhierarchical Learning Models,” Psychometrika, 48 (March), 85–97.
39.
RustRoland T. and SchmittleinDavid C. (1985), “A Bayesian Cross-Validated Likelihood Method for Comparing Alternative Specifications of Quantative Models,” Marketing Science, 4 (Winter), 20–40.
40.
StaffordEdward F., KasulisJack J., and LuschRobert F. (1982), “Consumer Behavior in Accumulating Household Financial Assets,” Journal of Business Research, 10 (December), 397–417.
41.
ZaltmanGerald, PerloffRobert, and ValleValerie A. (1980), The Elderly as Victims of Consumer Deception. A Final Report to the Administration on Aging.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
