Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investigation of giving behavior to united way using log-linear modeling and discriminant analysis: An empirical study

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Giving behavior toward a charitable organization is modeled by two different procedures: discriminant analysis and a log-linear model. Although the discriminant procedure is beter known in marketing, the log-linear approach has less restrictive model assumptions and may more accurately represent the conceptual basis of consumer decisions. Two situations are considered: (1) a simple binary classification of the giving decision, and (2) a three-group case of no gift, small, and large gift. Utilizing a large data base and a holdout sample for comparative purposes, the log-linear procedure is found to be an attractive alternative to discriminant analysis in terms of correct classification of individuals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aitchison, J. and Bennet, J. 1970. “Polychotomous Quantal Response by Maximum Indicant,”Biometrika 57 (August) 253–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitchison, J. and Silvey, S. 1957. “The Generalization of Probit Analysis to the Case of Multiple Responses,”Biometrika 44 (June) 131–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, James A. 1974. “A Threshold Model of Attribute Satisfaction Decisions,”Journal of Consumer Research 1 (September) 30–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, Y.M.M., Feinberg, S.E., and Holland, P.W. 1975.Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blattberg, Robert C. and Dolan, Robert J. 1981. “An Assessment of the Contribution of Log Linear Models to Marketing Research,”Journal of Marketing 45 (Spring) 89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeSarbo, Wayne S. and Hildebrand, David K. 1980. “A Marketer’s Guide to Log-Linear Models for Qualitative Data Analysis,”Journal of Marketing 44 (Summer) 40–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, Peter 1977. “The Application of Probit, Logit, and Tobit in Marketing: A Review,”Journal of Business Research 5 (September) 235–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenbeis, Robert A. 1977. “Pitfalls in the Application of Discriminant Analysis in Business, Finance, and Economics,”Journal of Finance 32 (June) 875–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engel, J.F., Kollat, D.T. and Blackwell, R.D. 1973.Consumer Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney, D.J. 1947.Probit Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, Leo A. 1971. “The Analysis of Multidimensional Contingency Tables: Stepwise Procedures and Direct Estimator Models for Building Models for Multiple Classifications,”Technometrics 13 (February) 33–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, Paul, Carmone, Frank, and Wachpress, David 1977. “On the Analysis of Qualitative Data in Marketing Research,”Journal of Marketing Research 14 (February) 52–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hickman, Edgar P. and Selen, Willem 1981. “Probit Analysis: An Alternative Classification Procedure for Multivariate Observations,”Proceedings of Southeast AIDS Conference 221–223.

  • Jones, J. Morgan and Zufryden, Fred S. 1982. “An Approach for Assessing Demographic and Price Influences on Brand Purchase Behavior,”Journal of Marketing 46 (Winter) 36–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kau, Paul and Hill, Lowell 1972. “A Threshold Model of Purchasing Decisions,”Journal of Marketing Research 9 (August) 264–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, Richard, and Zavoina, William 1975. ]ldA Statistical Model for the Analysis of Ordinal Level Dependent Variables,”Journal of Mathematical Sociology 4 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, Donald G. 1969. “On the Interpretation of Discriminant Analysis,”Journal of Marketing Research 6 (May) 156–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Press, S. James and Wilson, Sandra 1978. “Choosing Between Logistic Regression and Discriminant Analysis,”Journal of the American Statistical Association 73 (December) 699–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swafford, Michael 1980. “Three Parametric Techniques for Contingency Table Analysis: A Nontechnical Commentary,”American Sociological Review 45 (August) 664–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theil, Henri 1969. “A Multinomial Extension of the Linear Logit Model,”International Economic Review 10 (October) 251–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Louisville, Louisville, USA

    Arthur J. Adams Ph.D. & Subhash C. Lonial Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Arthur J. Adams Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Subhash C. Lonial Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Research support for this study was provided by the School of Business, University of Louisville

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adams, A.J., Lonial, S.C. Investigation of giving behavior to united way using log-linear modeling and discriminant analysis: An empirical study. JAMS 12, 77–88 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02739320

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02739320

Keywords

Search

Navigation