Advertisement

The Strategic Effects of State-Dependent Consumer Preferences: The Roles of Habits and Variety Seeking

  • Raphael ThomadsenEmail author
  • P. B. (Seethu) Seetharaman
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we examine the strategic effects of state-dependent consumer preferences, including effects of habits and variety seeking. We begin by discussing how habits and variety seeking have been modelled in the quantitative marketing and economics literatures. We then discuss the various ways that these state-dependent preferences affect pricing, which is the most studied strategic effect of habit and variety seeking. We also consider the impact of these preferences on different members of the retail channel, as well as considering how these preferences affect which products firms will offer and the optimal advertising levels, among other topics. While habits and variety seeking are often modelled as being the opposites of each other in models, they sometimes have similar impacts on prices and other strategies.

Keywords

Habit Variety seeking State dependence Pricing Marketing strategy 

References

  1. Adamowicz, W. L., & Swait, J. D. (2012). Are food choices really habitual? Integrating habits, variety-seeking and compensatory choice in a utility-maximizing framework. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 95(1), 17–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beggs, A., & Klemperer, P. (1992). Multi-period competition with switching costs. Econometrica, 60(3), 651–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bucklin, R. E., Gupta, S., & Han, S. (1995). A Brand’s eye view of response segmentation in consumer brand choice behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(1), 66–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cabral, L. (2009). Small switching costs lead to lower prices. Marketing Science, 46(4), 449–451.Google Scholar
  5. Cabral, L. (2012). Switching costs and equilibrium prices. Mimeo: New York University.Google Scholar
  6. Che, H., Sudhir, K., & Seetharaman, P. B. (2007). Bounded rationality in pricing under state-dependent demand: Do firms look ahead, and if so, how far? Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 434–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen, Y. (1997). Paying customers to switch. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 6(4), 877–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cosguner, K., Chan, T. Y., & (Seethu) Seetharaman, P. B. (2017). Behavioral price discrimination in the presence of switching cost. Marketing Science, 36(3), 426–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cosguner, K., Chan, T. Y., & (Seethu) Seetharaman, P. B. (2018). Dynamic pricing in a distribution channel in the presence of switching costs. Management Science, 64(3), 1212–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doganoglu, T. (2010). Switching costs, experience goods, and dynamic price competition. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 8(2), 167–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dubè, J.-P., Hitsch, G. J., & Rossi, P. E. (2009). Do switching costs make markets less competitive? Journal of Marketing Research, 46(4), 435–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dubè, J.-P., Hitsch, G. J., & Rossi, P. E. (2010). State dependence and alternative explanations for consumer inertia. RAND Journal of Economics, 41(3), 417–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dubè, J.-P., Hitsch, G. J., Rossi, P. E., & Vitorino, M. A. (2008). Category pricing with state-dependent utility. Marketing Science, 27(3), 417–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Erdem, T. (1996). A dynamic analysis of market structure based on panel data. Marketing Science, 15(4), 359–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Erdem, T., & Sun, B. (2001). Testing for choice dynamics in panel data. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 19(2), 142–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Farrell, J. (1986). A note on inertia in market share. Economics Letters, 21(1), 73–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farrell, J., & Klemperer, P. (2007). Coordination and lock-in: competition with switching costs and network effect. In M. Armstrong & R. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial Organization (Vol. 3, pp. 1967–2072).Google Scholar
  18. Farrell, J., & Shapiro, C. (1988). Dynamic competition with switching costs. RAND Journal of Economics, 19, 123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Feinberg, F. M., Kahn, B. E., & McAlister, L. (1992). Market share response when consumers seek variety. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frank, R. E. (1962). Brand choice as a probability process. The Journal of Business, 35(1), 43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Freimer, M., & Horsky, D. (2008). Try it, you will like it—Does consumer learning lead to competitive price promotions? Marketing Science, 27(5), 796–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goldfarb, A. (2006). State dependence at internet portals. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 15(2), 317–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guadagni, P. M., & Little, J. D. C. (1983). A logit model of brand choice calibrated on scanner data. Marketing Science, 2(3), 203–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gupta, S., Chintagunta, P. K., & Wittink, D. R. (1997). Household heterogeneity and state dependence in a model of purchase strings: Empirical results and managerial implications. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14, 341–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Handel, B. (2013). Adverse selection and inertia in health insurance markets: When nudging hurts. The American Economic Review, 103(7), 2643–2682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Herniter, J. D., & Magee, J. F. (1961). Customer behavior as a Markov process. Operations Research, 9(1), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Inman, J. J., Park, J., & Sinha, A. (2008). A dynamic choice map approach to modeling attribute-level varied behavior among Stockkeeping units. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(1), 94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Keane, M. P. (1997). Modeling heterogeneity and state dependence in consumer choice behavior. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 15(3), 310–327.Google Scholar
  29. Klemperer, P. (1987a). Markets with consumer switching costs. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102(2), 375–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Klemperer, P. (1987b). The competitiveness of markets with switching costs. RAND Journal of Economics, 18(1), 138–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klemperer, P. (1995). Competition when consumers have switching costs: An overview with applications to industrial organization, macroeconomics, and international trade. Review of Economic Studies, 62(4), 515–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lattin, J. M., & McAlister, L. (1985). Using a variety seeking model to identify substitute and complementary relationships among competing products. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 141–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lipstein, B. (1959). The dynamics of brand loyalty and brand switching. Better measurements of advertising effectiveness: the challenge of the 196’s, Proceedings 5th Annual Conference of the Advertising Research Foundation, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Massy, W. F. (1966). Order and homogeneity of family specific brand-switching processes. Journal of Marketing Research, 3(1), 48–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nguyen, D. (2014). Switching to variety seeking: the effects of consumer variety seeking on product line strategies. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  36. Padilla, A. J. (1995). Revisiting dynamic duopoly with consumer switching costs. Journal of Economic Theory, 67(2), 520–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pavlidis, P., & Ellickson, P. B. (2017). Implications of parent brand inertia for multiproduct pricing. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 15(4), 369–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Roy, R., Chintagunta, P., & Haldar, S. (1996). A framework for investigating habits, “the hand of the past,” and heterogeneity in dynamic brand choice. Marketing Science, 15(3), 280–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sajeesh, S., & Raju, J. S. (2010). Positioning and pricing in a variety seeking market. Management Science, 56(6), 949–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Seetharaman, P. B. (2004). Modeling multiple sources of state dependence in random utility models: A distributed lag approach. Marketing Science, 23(2), 263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Seetharaman, P. B., Ainslie, A., & Chintagunta, P. K. (1999). Investigating household state dependence effects across categories. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(4), 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Seetharaman, P. B., & Che, H. (2009). Price competition in markets with consumer variety seeking. Marketing Science, 28(3), 403–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shaffer, G., & John Zhang, Z. (2000). Pay to switch or pay to stay: Preference-based price discrimination in markets with switching costs. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 9(3), 397–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shin, S., Misra, S., & Horsky, D. (2012). Disentangling preferences and learning in brand choice models. Marketing Science, 31(1), 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shum, M. (2004). Does advertising overcome brand loyalty? Evidence from the breakfast-cereal market. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 13(2), 241–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Styan, G. P. H., & Smith Jr., H. (1964). Markov chains applied to marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 1(1), 50–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taylor, C. (2003). Supplier surfing: Competition and consumer behavior in subscription markets. RAND Journal of Economics, 34(2), 223–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Viard, B. (2007). Do switching costs make markets more or less competitive? The case of 800-number portability. RAND Journal of Economics, 38(1), 146–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Villas-Boas, J. M. (2004). Consumer learning, brand loyalty, and competition. Marketing Science, 23(1), 134–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Villas-Boas, J. M. (2006). Dynamic competition with experience goods. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 15(1), 37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Villas-Boas, J. M. (2015). A short survey on switching costs and dynamic competition. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32, 219–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Von Weizsäcker, C. C. (1984). The costs of substitution. Econometrica, 52(5), 1085–1116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zeithammer, R., & Thomadsen, R. (2013). Vertical differentiation with variety-seeking consumers. Management Science, 59(2), 390–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raphael Thomadsen
    • 1
    Email author
  • P. B. (Seethu) Seetharaman
    • 1
  1. 1.Olin Business SchoolWashington University in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations