Skip to main content

A Model for Observation, Structural, and Household Heterogeneity in Panel Data


Standard methods of understanding customer behavior in marketing allow for differences in sensitivity across consumers, but often assume that the sensitivity of a particular individual is fixed through time. In many situations, this assumption may not be valid. Both the importance of variables, and the manner that they are combined to form an overall measure of value for an offer, can change. In this paper we propose an approach of modeling a customer's purchase history that allows identification of when these aspects of customer behavior are likely to change. This information is useful, for example, in planning when particular customers will be most likely to respond to an offer. Our approach nests common methods of dealing with individual differences, and allows for the introduction of covariates associated with changes in customer behavior. We illustrate our model with data from a national sample of credit card usage and adoption.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. Allenby, Greg M., Arora, Neeraj and James L. Ginter. (1998). “On the Heterogeneity of Demand,” Journal of Marketing Research 35, 384–389.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allenby, Greg M. and Peter E. Rossi. (1999). “Marketing Models of Household Heterogeneity,” Journal of Econometrics, forthcoming 89, 57–78.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Allenby, Greg M. and James L. Ginter. (1995). “Using Extremes to Design Products and Segment Markets,” Journal of Marketing Research 33, 392–403.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arora, Neeraj, Onur Bodur, Noreen Klein. (1999). “Investigating How Consumers Process Multiple Reference Prices,” Working Paper.

  5. Bell, David R. and James M. Lattin. (1996). “Looking for Los Aversion in Scanner Panel Data: The Confounding Effect of Price-Response Heterogeneity,” Working Paper #1259, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University.

  6. Burnkrant Robert E. and H. Rao Unnava. (1995). “Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Research 22, 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cadotte, Ernest R., Robert B. Woodruff and Roger L. Jenkins. (1987). “Expectations and Norms in Models of Consumer Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing Research 24, 305–314.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gelfand, Alan and Adrian Smith. (1990). “Sampling-based Approaches to Calculating Marginal Densities,” Journal of the American Statistical Society 85, 398–409.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gensch, H. Dennis. (1985). “Empirically Testing a Disaggregate Choice Model for Segments,” Journal of Marketing Research 462–467.

  10. Gensch, H. Dennis. (1987). “Empirical Evidence Supporting the Use of Multiple Choice Models in Analyzing a Population,” Journal of Marketing Research 192–207.

  11. Jain Dipak C., Naufel J. Vilcassim and Pradeep K. Chintagunta. (1994). “A Random Coefficients Logit Brand-Choice Model Applied to Panel Data,” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 12, 317–328.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kamakura, Wagner A., Kim, Byung-Do and Jonathan Lee. (1996). “Modeling Preference and Structural Heterogeneity in Consumer Choice,” Marketing Science 15, 152–172.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kamakura, Wagner A., and Gary J. Russell. (1989). “A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure,” Journal of Marketing Research 26, 379–390.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lattin, James M. and Randolph E. Bucklin. (1989). “Reference Effects of Price and Promotion on Brand Choice Behavior,” Journal of Marketing Research 26, 299–310.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lenk, Peter J. and Wayne S. DeSarbo. (1997). “Bayesian Inference of Finite Mixture, Random Effects, Generalized Linear Models,” working paper, University of Michigan.

  16. Mayhew, Glenn E. and Russell S. Winer. (1992). “An Empirical Analysis of Internal and External Reference Prices Using Scanner Data,” Journal of Consumer Research June 19(1), 62–70.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mazumdar, Tridib and Purushottam Papatla. (1999). “An Investigation of Reference Price Segments,” Forthcoming, Journal of Marketing Research.

  18. Newton, Michael A. and Adrian E. Raftery. (1994). “Approximating Bayesian Inference with the Weighted Likelihood Bootstrap,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (B) 56, 3–48.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ostrom Amy and Dawn Iacobucci. (1995). “Consumer Trade-Offs and the Evaluation of Service,” Journal of Marketing 59, 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo. (1986). Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rajendran, K.N. and Gerald J. Tellis. (1994). “Contextual and Temporal Components of Reference Price” Journal of Marketing, 58 (January), 22–34.

  22. Rossi, Peter E., Robert E. McCulloch and Greg M. Allenby. (1996). The Value of Purchase History Data in Target Marketing, Marketing Science 15, 321–340.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Winer, Russell S. (1986). “A Reference Price Model of Band Choice for Frequently Purchased Consumer Products” Journal of Consumer Research 13, 250–56.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yang, S., Allenby, G.M. A Model for Observation, Structural, and Household Heterogeneity in Panel Data. Marketing Letters 11, 137–149 (2000).

Download citation


  • Marketing
  • Standard Method
  • Individual Difference
  • Common Method
  • Panel Data