The authors investigate whether household scanner data provide representative inferences about brand choice behavior. They show the (analytical) equivalence of the homogeneous brand choice logit and the multinomial store sales models. Then, they determine how results for the homogeneous logit model estimated with actual household data deviate from results for the multinomial model estimated with actual store data from the same community. They also perform this comparison using model specifications that provide average estimated parameters while accommodating unobserved household heterogeneity. The authors find statistical support for the hypothesis that panelist households are not representative, whether household heterogeneity is or is not accommodated. Substantively, however, the average estimated price elasticities are close for the household and store data analyzed, if the household data are selected on the basis of purchase selection. An alternative selection procedure, called household selection, which is used for the analysis of complete household purchase records, provides results that strongly differ from the purchase selection results.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
A. C. Nielsen Company (1988), Manual accompanying single-source data made available to the Marketing Science Institute.
2.
AbeMakoto, and KalyanamKirthi (1994), “Store Sales and Panel Purchase Data: Are they Compatible?” working paper, Department of Marketing, University of Illinois at Chicago.
3.
AllenbyGreg, and LenkPeter (1995), “Reassessing Brand Loyalty, Price Sensitivity and Merchandising Effects on Consumer Brand Choice,”Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 13(July), 281–89.
4.
AllenbyGreg, and RossiPeter E. (1991a), “Quality Perceptions and Asymmetric Switching Between Brands,”Marketing Science, 10(3), 185–204.
5.
AllenbyGreg, and RossiPeter E. (1991b), “There Is No Aggregation Bias: Why Macro Logit Models Work,”Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 9(1), 1–14.
Ben-AkivaMoshe, and LermanSteven (1985), Discrete Choice Analysis.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
8.
BhattacharyaChitrabhanu, FaderPeter S., LodishLeonard M., and DeSarboWayne S. (1996), “The Relationship Between the Marketing Mix and Share of Category Requirements,”Marketing Letters, 7(January), 5–18.
9.
BlattbergRobert C., and WisniewskiKenneth J. (1989), “Price Induced Patterns of Competition,”Marketing Science, 4(Fall), 291–309.
10.
BoltonRuth N. (1989), “The Robustness of Retail Level Price Elasticity Estimates,”Journal of Retailing, 65(2), 193–219.
11.
ChintaguntaPradeep K., JainDipak C., and VilcassimNaufel J. (1991), “Investigating Heterogeneity in Brand Preferences in Logit Models for Panel Data,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28(November), 417–28.
12.
ChristenMarkus, GuptaSachin, PorterJohn, StaelinRichard, and WittinkDick R. (1995), “Using Market-Level Data to Understand the Effectiveness of Promotional Activities,” working paper, Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University.
ClarkeDarrall G. (1984), “G. D. Searle (I),” Harvard Business School Case #9-585-010, Harvard Business School, Boston.
15.
ClarkeDarrall G. (1985), “G. D. Searle (II),” Harvard Business School Case #9-586-023, Harvard Business School, Boston.
16.
CooperLee, and NakanishiMasao A. (1988), Market Share Analysis: Evaluating Competitive Marketing Effectiveness.Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.
17.
ElrodTerry (1988), “Choice Map: Inferring a Product-Market Map From Panel Data,”Marketing Science, 7(Winter), 21–40.
18.
FaderPeter S., and LodishLeonard M. (1990), “A Cross-Category Analysis of Category Structure and Promotional Activity for Grocery Products,”Journal of Marketing, 54(October), 52–65.
19.
GonulFusun, and SrinivasanK. (1993), “Modeling Multiple Sources of Heterogeneity in Multinomial Logit Models: Methodological and Managerial Issues,”Marketing Science, 12(3), 213–29.
20.
GroverRajiv, and SrinivasanV. (1987), “A Simultaneous Approach to Market Segmentation and Market Structuring,”Journal of Marketing Research, 24(May), 139–53.
21.
GuadagniPeter M., and LittleJohn D. C. (1983), “A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data,”Marketing Science, 2(3), 203–38.
22.
GuptaSachin, and ChintaguntaPradeep K. (1994), “On Using Demographic Variables to Determine Segment Membership in Logit Mixture Models,”Journal of Marketing Research, 31(February), 128–36.
23.
GuptaSunil (1988), “Impact of Sales Promotions on When, What, and How Much to Buy,”Journal of Marketing Research, 25(November), 342–55.
24.
HochStephen J., KimByung-Do, MontgomeryAlan L., and RossiPeter E. (1994), “Determinants of Store-Level Price Elasticity,”Journal of Marketing Research, 32(February), 17–29.
25.
HsiaoCheng (1986), The Analysis of Panel Data.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26.
JainD. C., VilcassimN. J., and ChintaguntaP. K. (1994), “A Random-Coefficients Logit Brand Choice Model Applied to Panel Data,”Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 12(3), 317–28.
27.
JohnstonJ. (1984), Econometric Methods, 3d ed.New York: McGraw Hill.
28.
KalyanaramGurumurthy, and WinerRussell S. (1995), “Empirical Generalizations From Reference Price Research,”Marketing Science, 14(3, Part 2) G 161–69.
29.
KamakuraWagner A., and RussellGary J. (1989), “A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure,”Journal of Marketing Research, 26(November), 379–90.
KimByung-Do, and RossiPeter E. (1994), “Purchase Frequency, Sample Selection, and Price Sensitivity: The Heavy User Bias,”Marketing Letters,5(1), 57–67.
32.
KrishnamurthiLakshman, and RajS. P. (1988), “A Model of Brand Choice and Purchase Quantity Price Sensitivities,”Marketing Science, 7(1), 1–20.
33.
KumarV., and LeoneRobert (1988), “Measuring the Effects of Retail Store Promotions on Brand and Store Substitution,”Journal of Marketing Research, 25(May), 178–85.
34.
MorrisonDonald F. (1990), Multivariate Statistical Methods.New York: McGraw Hill.
35.
NarasimhanChakravarthi, and RenkenTimothy D. (1992), “The Representativeness of Panel Members’ Purchase Behavior,” working paper, Olin School of Business, Washington University.
36.
RossiPeter, McCullochRobert E., and AllenbyGreg (1995), “The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing,” Technical Report No. 134, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago.
37.
RossiPeter, and AllenbyGreg M. (1994), “A Bayesian Approach to Estimating Household Parameters,”Journal of Marketing Research, 30(May), 171–182.
38.
RussellGary J., and KamakuraWagner A. (1994), “Understanding Brand Competition Using Micro and Macro Scanner Data,”Journal of Marketing Research, 31(May), 289–303.
39.
StuartAlan, and Keith OrdJ. (1987), Kendall's Advanced Theory of Statistics, Vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press.
40.
SudmanSeymour, and FerberRobert (1979), Consumer Panels.Chicago: American Marketing Association.
41.
SwaitJoffre, and LouviereJordan (1993), “The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models,”Journal of Marketing Research, 30(August), 305–14.
42.
TellisGerard J., and ZufrydenFred S. (1995), “A Dynamic Model for Optimizing the Timing and Depth of Retail Discounts,”Marketing Science, 14(3, Part 1), 271–99.
43.
WinerRussell S. (1983), “Attrition Bias in Econometric Models Estimated With Panel Data,”Journal of Marketing Research, 20(May), 177–86.
44.
WittinkDick R., AddonaMichael J., HawkesWilliam J., and PorterJohn C. (1988), “SCAN*PRO: The Estimation, Validation, and Use of Promotional Effects Based on Scanner Data,” working paper, Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University.
45.
ZenorMichael J., and SrivastavaRajendra K. (1993), “Inferring Market Structure With Aggregate Data: A Latent Segment Log-it Approach,”Journal of Marketing Research, 30(August), 369–79.
