In this note, the authors propose several extensions of the model of consumer learning in conjoint analysis that Bradlow, Hu, and Ho (2004) develop. They present a clarification of the original model, propose an integration of several new imputation rules, add new measurement metrics for pattern matching, and draw a roadmap for further real-world tests. The authors also discuss general modeling challenges when researchers want to mathematically define and integrate behavioral regularities into traditional quantitative domains. They conclude by suggesting several critical success factors for modeling behavioral regularities in marketing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbaJoseph W., and CookeAlan D.J. (2004), “When Absence Begets Inference in Conjoint Analysis,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(November), 382–87.
2.
BodapatiAnand V., and DroletAimee (2003), “A Hybrid Choice Model that Uses Absolute and Ordinal Value Information,” working paper, Anderson School, University of California, Los Angeles.
3.
BradlowEric T., HuYe, and HoTeck-Hua (2004), “A Learning-Based Model for Imputing Missing Levels in Partial Conjoint Profiles,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(November), 369–81.
4.
BradlowEric T., and ThomasN. (1998), “Item Response Theory Models Applied to Data Allowing Examinee Choice,”Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23(3), 236–43.
5.
CamererColin F., and HoTeck-Hua (1999), “Experience-Weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games,”Econometrica, 67(4), 837–74.
6.
CamererColin F., HoTeck-Hua, and ChongJuin-Kuan (2004), “A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games,”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(3), 861–98.
7.
HardieBruce G.S., JohnsonEric J., and FaderPeter S. (1993), “Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice,”Marketing Science, 12(4), 378–94.
8.
KahnBarbara E., and RajuJagmohan S. (1991), “Effects of Price Promotions on Variety-Seeking and Reinforcement Behavior,”Marketing Science, 10(4), 316–37.
9.
KivetzRan, NetzerOded, and SrinivasanV. (2004), “Alternative Models for Capturing the Compromise Effect,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(August), 237–57.
10.
LeeflangPeter S.H., WittinkDick R., WedelMichel, and NaertPhilippe A. eds. (2000), Building Models for Marketing Decisions.New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
11.
LittleJohn D.C. (1970), “Models and Managers: The Concept of a Decision Calculus,”Management Science, 16(8), B466–85.
12.
RaoVithala R. (2004), “Comments on Conjoint Analysis with Partial Profiles,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(November), 388–89.
13.
RubinDonald B. (1976), “Inference and Missing Data,”Biometrika, 63(3), 581–92.
14.
RubinDonald B. (1984), “Bayesianly Justifiable and Relevant Frequency Calculations for the Applied Statistician,”Annals of Statistics, 12, 1151–72.
15.
RubinDonald B. (2004), “Design and Modeling in Conjoint Analysis with Partial Profiles,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(November), 390–91.
16.
RubinDonald B., and SternH. (1994), “Testing in Latent Class Models Using a Posterior Predictive Check Distribution,” in Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research, Von EyeA., and CloggC.C., eds. London: Sage Publications, 420–38.
