Alleviating the constant stochastic variance assumption in decision research: Theory, measurement, and experimental test

Marketing Science

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 1-17

  Salisbury, Linda Court ^a   Feinberg, Fred M ^b  

^a BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Brand choice; Choice models; Decision making over time; Decisions under uncertainty; Econometric models; Lab experiments; Measurement and inference; Probability models; Simulation; Stochastic models

Indexed keywords

EID: 76049098986     PISSN: 07322399     EISSN: 1526548X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1080.0464     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adamowicz, W., D. Bunch, T. A. Cameron, B. G. C. Dellaert, M. Hanneman, M. Keane, J. Louviere, R. Meyer, T. Steenburgh, J. Swait. 2008. Behavioral frontiers in choice modeling. Marketing Lett. 19(3/4) 215-228.
2. Allenby, G. M., J. L. Ginter. 1995. The effects of in-store displays and feature advertising on consideration sets. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 12(1) 67-80.
3. Allenby, G. M., P. E. Rossi. 1999. Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity. J. Econometrics 89(1-2) 57-78.
4. Anderson, C. J. 2003. The psychology of doing nothing: Forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psych. Bull. 129(1) 139-167.
5. Andrews, R. L., A. Ainslie, I. S. Currim. 2008. On the recoverability of choice behaviors with random coefficients choice models in the context of limited data and unobserved effects. Management Sci. 54(1) 83-99.
6. Baltas, G., P. Doyle. 2001. Random utility models in marketing research: A survey. J. Bus. Res. 51(2) 115-125.
7. Bhat, C. R. 1995. A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice. Transportation Res. B. 29(6) 471-483.
8. Bradley, M. A., A. J. Daly. 1994. Use of the logit scaling approach to test for rank-order and fatigue effects in stated preference data. Transportation 21(2) 167-184.
9. Dhar, R. 1997. Consumer preference for a no-choice option. J. Consumer Res. 24(2) 215-231
10. Engle, R. F. 1982. Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of variance of United Kingdom inflation. Econometrica 50(4) 987-1008.
11. Harding, M. C., J. Hausman. 2006. Flexible parametric estimation of the taste distribution in random coefficients logit models. Working paper, MIT Department of Economics, Cambridge, MA.
12. Hensher, D. A., J. J. Louviere, J. D. Swait. 1999. Combining sources of preference data. J. Econometrics 89(1-2) 197-221.
13. Iyengar, S. S., M. R. Lepper. 2000. When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 79(6) 995-1006.
14. Jöreskog, K. G. 1994. On the estimation of polychoric correlations and their asymptotic covariance matrix. Psychometrika 59(3) 381-389.
15. Kahneman, D., J. Snell. 1992. Predicting a changing taste: Do people know what they will like? J. Behavioral Decision Making 5(3) 187-200.
16. Kahneman, D., P. P. Wakker, R. Sarin. 1997. Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quart. J. Econom. 112(2) 375-405.
17. Keren, G., P. Roelofsma. 1995. Immediacy and certainty in intertemporal choice. Organ. Behavioral Hum. Dec. 63(3) 287-297.
18. Kivetz, R., I. Simonson. 2002. Self-control for the righteous: Toward a theory of precommitment to indulgence. J. Consumer Res. 29(2) 199-217.
19. Kreps, D. M. 1979. A representation theorem for preference flexibility. Econometrica 47(3) 565-577.
20. Lawrence, E., D. Bingham, C. Liu, V. Nair. 2008. Bayesian inference for multivariate ordinal data using parameter expansion. Technometrics 50(2) 182-191.
21. Loewenstein, G. 2001. The creative destruction of decision research. J. Consumer Res. 28(3) 499-505.
22. Louviere, J. J. 2001. What if consumer experiments impact variances as well as means? Response variability as a behavioral phenomenon. J. Consumer Res. 28(3) 506-511.
23. Louviere, J. J., T. Eagle. 2006. Confound it! That pesky little scale constant messes up our convenient assumptions! Proc. 2006 Sawtooth Software Conf., Delray Beach, FL, Sawtooth Software, Sequim, WA, 211-228.
24. Louviere, J. J., R. J. Meyer. 2007. Formal choice models of informal choices: What choice modeling research can (and can't) learn from behavioral theory. N. K. Malhotra, ed. Review of Marketing Research, Vol. 4. M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, 3-32.
25. Louviere, J. J., D. A. Hensher, J. D. Swait. 2000. Stated Choice Methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
26. Louviere, J. J., D. Street, R. Carson, A. Ainslie, J. R. DeShazo, T. Cameron, D. Hensher, R. Kohn, T. Marley. 2002. Dissecting the random component of utility. Marketing Lett. 13(3) 177-193.
27. McFadden, D. 1974. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. P. Zarembka, ed. Frontiers in Econometrics. Academic Press, New York, 105-142.
28. Read, D., G. Loewenstein. 1995. Diversification bias: Explaining the discrepancy in variety seeking between combined and separated choices. J. Experiment. Psych.-Appl. 1(1) 34-49.
29. Read, D., G. Loewenstein, S. Kalyanaraman. 1999. Mixing virtue and vice: Combining the immediacy effect and the diversification heuristic. J. Behavioral Decision Making 12(4) 257-273.
30. Read, D., G. Antonides, L. van den Ouden, H. Trienekens. 2001. Which is better: Simultaneous or sequential choice? Organ. Behav. Human Dec. 84(1) 54-70.
31. Seetharaman, P. B. 2004. Modeling multiple sources of state dependence in random utility models: A distributed lag approach. Marketing Sci. 23(2) 263-271.
32. Seetharaman, P. B., P. K. Chintagunta. 1998. A model of intertia and variety seeking with marketing variables. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 15(1) 1-17.
33. Simonson, I. 1990. The effect of purchase quantity and timing on variety-seeking behavior. J. Marketing Res. 27(2) 150-162.
34. Swait, J., J. Louviere. 1993. The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. J. Marketing Res. 30(3) 305-314.
35. Walsh, J. W. 1995. Flexibility in consumer purchasing for uncertain future tastes. Marketing Sci. 14(2) 148-165.