Asia Marketing Journal

Korean Marketing Association (한국마케팅학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effect of Consideration Set on Market Structure

  • Kim, Jun B. (Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2020.03.19
  • Accepted : 2020.06.16
  • Published : 2020.07.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

We estimate a choice-based aggregate demand model accounting for consumers' consideration sets, and study its implications on market structure. In contrast to past research, we model and estimate consumer demand using aggregate-level consumer browsing data in addition to aggregate-level choice data. The use of consumer browsing data allows us to study consumer demand in a realistic setting in which consumers choose from a subset of products. We calibrate the proposed model on both data sets, avoid biases in parameter estimates, and compute the price elasticity measures. As an empirical application, we estimate consumer demand in the camcorder category and study its implications on market structure. The proposed model predicts a limited consumer price response and offers a more discriminating competitive landscape from the one assuming universal consideration set.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by the Institute of Management Research at Seoul National University.

References

  1. Alba, J., Hutchinson, J. W., Lynch, J. G., Robertson, T. S., & Kassarjian, H. (1991). Handbook of consumer behavior.
  2. Berry, S., Levinsohn, J., & Pakes, A. (1995). Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 841-890.
  3. Bettman, J. R., & Park, C. W. (1980). Effects of prior knowledge and experience and phase of the choice process on consumer decision processes: A protocol analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 234-248. https://doi.org/10.1086/208812
  4. Bettman, J. R. (1979). Information Processing theory of Consumer Choice. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
  5. Bronnenberg, B. J., & Vanhonacker, W. R. (1996). Limited choice sets, local price response, and implied measures of price competition. Journal of Marketing Research, 33(2), 163-173. https://doi.org/10.2307/3152144
  6. Bruno, H. A., & Vilcassim, N. J. (2008). Research note-structural demand estimation with varying product availability. Marketing Science, 27(6), 1126-1131. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1080.0366
  7. Chakravarti, A., & Janiszewski, C. (2003). The influence of macro-level motives on consideration set composition in novel purchase situations. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 244-258. https://doi.org/10.1086/376803
  8. Chiang, J., Chib, S., & Narasimhan, C. (1998). Markov chain Monte Carlo and models of consideration set and parameter heterogeneity. Journal of Econometrics, 89(1-2), 223-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00062-1
  9. Goeree, M. S. (2008). Limited information and advertising in the US personal computer industry. Econometrica, 76(5), 1017-1074. https://doi.org/10.3982/ecta4158
  10. Horowitz, J. L., & Louviere, J. J. (1995). What is the role of consideration sets in choice modeling?. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(1), 39-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(95)00004-L
  11. Kamakura, W. A., & Russell, G. J. (1989). A probabilistic choice model for market segmentation and elasticity structure. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(4), 379-390. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172759
  12. Kim, J. B. (2019). Competitive Analysis among Multi-product Firms. Asia Marketing Journal, 21(3), 47-64. https://doi.org/10.15830/amj.2019.21.3.47
  13. Knittel, C. R., & Metaxoglou, K. (2014). Estimation of random-coefficient demand models: two empiricists' perspective. Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(1), 34-59. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00394
  14. Moe, W. W. (2006). An empirical two-stage choice model with varying decision rules applied to internet clickstream data. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 680-692. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.4.680
  15. Nevo, A. (2000). A practitioner's guide to estimation of random-coefficients logit models of demand. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 9(4), 513-548. https://doi.org/10.1162/105864000567954
  16. Nevo, A. (2001). Measuring market power in the ready-to-eat cereal industry. Econometrica, 69(2), 307-342. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00194
  17. Petrin, A. (2002). Quantifying the benefits of new products: The case of the minivan. Journal of Political Economy, 110(4), 705-729. https://doi.org/10.1086/340779
  18. Shocker, A. D., Ben-Akiva, M., Boccara, B., & Nedungadi, P. (1991). Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice: Issues, models, and suggestions. Marketing Letters, 2(3), 181-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02404071
  19. Shugan, Steven M. "The cost of thinking." Journal of Consumer Research, 7.2(1980), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1086/208799
  20. Siddarth, S., Bucklin, R. E., & Morrison, D. G. (1995). Making the cut: Modeling and analyzing choice set restriction in scanner panel data. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 255-266. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151979