Statistical Benefits of Choices from Subsets

Abstract Marketers often analyze multinomial choice from a set of branded products to learn about demand. Given a set of brands to study, the authors analyze three reasons why choices from strict subsets of the brands can contain more statistical information about demand than choices from all the brands in the study: First, making choices from smaller subsets is easier, so it is possible to use more choice tasks when the choice data come from a choice-based conjoint survey. Second, choices from subsets of brands better identify and more accurately estimate the covariance structure of unobserved utility shocks associated with brands. Third, subsets automatically balance the brand shares when some of the brands are less popular than others. The authors demonstrate these three benefits of subsets using a mixture of analytical results and numerical simulations and provide implications for the design of choice-based conjoint analyses. They find that the optimal subset size depends on the model, the number of b...

[1]  Imran S. Currim.  Predictive Testing of Consumer Choice Models Not Subject to Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives , 1982 .

[2]  Joel Huber,et al.  Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects , 1983 .

[3]  G. Chamberlain.  Asymptotic efficiency in semi-parametric models with censoring , 1986 .

[4]  Mark D. Uncles,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1987 .

[5]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making. , 1988 .

[6]  Gary J. Russell,et al.  Measuring Brand Value with Scanner Data , 1993 .

[7]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice , 1990 .

[8]  Michael Keane,et al.  A Note on Identification in the Multinomial Probit Model , 1992 .

[9]  A. Tversky,et al.  Context-dependent preferences , 1993 .

[10]  Mark J. Garratt,et al.  Efficient Experimental Design with Marketing Research Applications , 1994 .

[11]  Greg M. Allenby,et al.  Modeling Household Purchase Behavior with Logistic Normal Regression , 1994 .

[12]  Peter E. Rossi,et al.  An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model , 1994 .

[13]  Terry Elrod,et al.  A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data , 1995 .

[14]  Greg M. Allenby,et al.  Reassessing Brand Loyalty, Price Sensitivity, and Merchandising Effects on Consumer Brand Choice , 1995 .

[15]  P. Lenk,et al.  Hierarchical Bayes Conjoint Analysis: Recovery of Partworth Heterogeneity from Reduced Experimental Designs , 1996 .

[16]  Joel Huber,et al.  The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[17]  Joel Huber,et al.  Improving Parameter Estimates and Model Prediction by Aggregate Customization in Choice Experiments , 2001 .

[18]  M. Wedel,et al.  Designing Conjoint Choice Experiments Using Managers' Prior Beliefs , 2001 .

[19]  Thomas Mathew,et al.  Optimal designs for binary data under logistic regression , 2001 .

[20]  Peter E. Rossi,et al.  Bayesian Statistics and Marketing , 2005 .

[21]  J. R. DeShazo,et al.  Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency , 2002 .

[22]  J. R. DeShazo,et al.  Designing Transactions without Framing Effects in Iterative Question Formats , 2002 .

[23]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  A 20+ Years’ Retrospective on Choice Experiments , 2004 .

[24]  B. Orme.  Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research , 2005 .

[25]  Peter J. Lenk,et al.  Bayesian estimation of multivariate-normal models when dimensions are absent , 2006 .

[26]  Greg M. Allenby,et al.  Estimating Heterogeneous EBA and Economic Screening Rule Choice Models , 2006 .

[27]  Avi Goldfarb,et al.  Measuring Brand Value in an Equilibrium Framework , 2007, Mark. Sci..

[28]  W. Greene,et al.  计量经济分析 = Econometric analysis , 2009 .