Panel Data Discrete Choice Models of Consumer Demand

1. Introduction This chapter deals with the vast literature on panel data discrete choice models of consumer demand. The reason this area is so active is that very high quality data is available. Firms like Nielsen and IRI have, for over 30 years, been collecting panel data on households' purchases of consumer goods. This is known as ―scanner data,‖ because it is collected by check-out machine scanners. Available scanner data sets often follow households for several years, and record all their purchases in several different product categories. The typical data set not only contains information on the universal product codes (UPC) of the consumer goods that households buy on each shopping trip, but also information on several exogenous forcing variables, such as price and whether the goods were displayed or advertised in various ways. To my knowledge the first paper using scanner data to study the impact of price and other marketing variables on consumer demand was Guadagni and Little (1983) in Marketing Science. But few economists knew about scanner data until the mid to late 90s. Once they became aware of this treasure trove of data, they started to use it very actively. Today, estimation of demand models on scanner data has become a major part of the field of empirical industrial organization. Thus, the consumer demand literature based on scanner data is unusual relative to other literatures discussed in this Handbook in two respects. First, it remains true that the majority of work in this area is by marketers rather than economists. Second, this is an uncommon case where the ―imperial science‖ of economics (see, e.g., Stigler (1984)) has experienced a substantial knowledge transfer from another area (i.e., marketing). Furthermore, it should be noted that discrete choice models of consumer demand are also widely used in other fields like transportation research, agricultural and resource economics, environmental economics, etc.. Given that the literature on panel data models of consumer demand is so large, I will make no attempt to survey all the important papers in the field. Instead, I will focus on the main research questions that dominate this area, and the progress that has been made in addressing them. Thus, I apologize in advance for the many important papers that are not cited. The most salient feature of scanner panel data is that consumers exhibit substantial persistence in their brand choices. In the language of marketing, consumers show …

[1]  Gary J. Russell,et al.  A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure , 1989 .

[2]  Cheng Hsiao,et al.  Analysis of Panels and Limited Dependent Variable Models , 1999 .

[3]  Tülin Erdem,et al.  Learning Models: An Assessment of Progress, Challenges and New Developments , 2011 .

[4]  Daniel A. Ackerberg Advertising, Learning, and Consumer Choice in Experience Good Markets: A Structural Empirical Examin , 2003 .

[5]  Tülin Erdem,et al.  The Price Consideration Model of Brand Choice , 2009 .

[6]  Russell S. Winer,et al.  A reference price model of brand choice for frequently purchased products. , 1986 .

[7]  Michael P. Keane,et al.  A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimation Algorithm for Dynamic Panel Data Models with Unobserved Endogenous State Variables , 2007, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[8]  Kannan Srinivasan,et al.  Measuring the Impact of Promotions on Brand Switching Under Rational Consumer Behavior , 2002 .

[9]  M. Keane,et al.  Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets , 1996 .

[10]  Paul A. Ruud,et al.  Simulation of multivariate normal rectangle probabilities and their derivatives theoretical and computational results , 1996 .

[11]  John Geweke,et al.  Statistical inference in the multinomial multiperiod probit model , 1997 .

[12]  Robert A. Moffitt,et al.  A COMPUTATIONALLY EFFICIENT QUADRATURE PROCEDURE FOR THE ONE-FACTOR MULTINOMIAL PROBIT MODEL , 1982 .

[13]  Nada Wasi,et al.  COMPARING ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF HETEROGENEITY IN CONSUMER CHOICE BEHAVIOR , 2012 .

[14]  Michael P. Keane,et al.  A model of health plan choice:: Inferring preferences and perceptions from a combination of revealed preference and attitudinal data , 1998 .

[15]  Kenneth I. Wolpin,et al.  The Effect of Parental Transfers and Borrowing Constraints On Educational Attainment , 1999 .

[16]  Jeffrey M. Woodbridge Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2002 .

[17]  Dominique M. Hanssens,et al.  The Long-Term Effects of Price Promotions on Category Incidence, Brand Choice, and Purchase Quantity , 2002 .

[18]  Andrew T. Ching,et al.  Consumer Learning and Heterogeneity: Dynamics of Demand for Prescription Drugs after Patent Expiration , 2001 .

[19]  Gregory S. Crawford,et al.  Uncertainty and Learning in Pharmaceutical Demand , 2005 .

[20]  D. Hyslop,et al.  State dependence, serial correlation and heterogeneity in intertemporal labor force , 1999 .

[21]  J. Geweke,et al.  Alternative computational approaches to inference in the multinomial probit model , 1994 .

[22]  K. Lancaster A New Approach to Consumer Theory , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[23]  Philip Hans Franses,et al.  A dynamic multinomial probit model for brand choice with different long‐run and short‐run effects of marketing‐mix variables , 2000 .

[24]  James J. Heckman,et al.  Longitudinal Analysis of Labor Market Data , 1985 .

[25]  C. Manski,et al.  On the Use of Simulated Frequencies to Approximate Choice Probabilities , 1981 .

[26]  Daniel A. Ackerberg Advertising, Learning, and Consumer Choice in Experience Good Markets: An Empirical Examination , 2003 .

[27]  M. Keane Modeling Heterogeneity and State Dependence in Consumer Choice Behavior , 1997 .

[28]  Martin D. Smith State dependence and heterogeneity in fishing location choice , 2005 .

[29]  M. Keane Structural vs. atheoretic approaches to econometrics , 2010 .

[30]  R. Preston McAfee,et al.  Equilibrium Price Dispersion with Consumer Inventories , 2002, J. Econ. Theory.

[31]  Dick R. Wittink,et al.  Is 75% of the Sales Promotion Bump Due to Brand Switching? No, Only 33% Is , 2003 .

[32]  M. Keane,et al.  Brand and Quantity Choice Dynamics Under Price Uncertainty , 2003 .

[33]  Kevin Lane Keller Branding and brand equity , 2002 .

[34]  J. Geweke,et al.  Computationally Intensive Methods for Integration in Econometrics , 2001 .

[35]  Dick R. Wittink,et al.  Decomposing the Sales Promotion Bump with Store Data , 2004 .

[36]  Tülin Erdem,et al.  A Dynamic Model of Brand Choice When Price and Advertising Signal Product Quality , 2007, Mark. Sci..

[37]  Michael Keane,et al.  A Structural Perspective on the Experimentalist School , 2010 .

[38]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  The Initial Conditions Problem in Dynamic, Nonlinear Panel Data Models with Unobserved Heterogeneity , 2002 .

[39]  D. McFadden,et al.  MIXED MNL MODELS FOR DISCRETE RESPONSE , 2000 .

[40]  H. D. Block,et al.  Random Orderings and Stochastic Theories of Responses (1960) , 1959 .

[41]  Steven T. Berry Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation , 1994 .

[42]  Steven Stern,et al.  A Method for Smoothing Simulated Moments of Discrete Probabilities in Multinomial Probit Models , 1992 .

[43]  Martin Pesendorfer Retail sales: a study of pricing behavior in supermarkets , 2002 .

[44]  John D. C. Little,et al.  A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data , 2011, Mark. Sci..

[45]  D. McFadden A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models Without Numerical Integration , 1989 .

[46]  Dick R. Wittink,et al.  The Estimation of Pre- and Postpromotion Dips with Store-Level Scanner Data , 2000 .

[47]  Scott A. Neslin,et al.  Sales Promotion , 2002 .

[48]  Michael Keane,et al.  A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimator for Panel Data , 1994 .

[49]  Steven Stern,et al.  Job Exit Behavior of Older Men , 1991 .

[50]  Ajay K. Manrai,et al.  Mds Maps for Product Attributes and Market Response: An Application to Scanner Panel Data , 1999 .

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

[52]  Michael Keane,et al.  Simulation estimation for panel data models with limited dependent variables , 1993 .

[53]  Steven T. Berry,et al.  Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium , 1995 .

[54]  Scott A. Neslin,et al.  The Determinants of Pre- and Postpromotion Dips in Sales of Frequently Purchased Goods , 2004 .

[55]  Tjalling C. Koopmans,et al.  Statistical Inference in Dynamic Economic Models , 1951 .

[56]  Russell S. Winer,et al.  Using Neoclassical Consumer-Choice Theory to Produce a Market Map From Purchase Data , 1994 .

[57]  Scott A. Neslin,et al.  Decomposition of the Sales Impact of Promotion-Induced Stockpiling , 2007 .

[58]  Peter E. Rossi,et al.  NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES STATE DEPENDENCE AND ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS FOR CONSUMER INERTIA , 2009 .

[59]  J. Geweke,et al.  Mixture of normals probit models , 1997 .

[60]  Terry Elrod,et al.  Choice Map: Inferring a Product-Market Map from Panel Data , 1988 .

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

[62]  M. Harding,et al.  A Bayesian mixed logit-probit model for multinomial choice , 2008 .

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

[64]  J. Heckman Heterogeneity and State Dependence , 1981 .

[65]  Gary Chamberlain,et al.  Longitudinal Analysis of Labor Market Data: Heterogeneity, omitted variable bias, and duration dependence , 1985 .

[66]  Martin Èihák Economics as an Imperial Science , 2000 .

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

[68]  D. McFadden Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .