Analysis of Sales Promotion Effects on Household Purchase Behavior

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Wedel, M., Kamakura, W.A., DeSarbo, W.S. and F. ter H<strong>of</strong>stede (1995), "Implication for Asymmetry, Nonproportionality, and Heterogeneity in Brand Switching from Piece-wise Exponential Mixture Hazard Models," Journal <strong>of</strong> Marketing Research, 32, 4, 457-462. Wedel, M. and W.A. DeSarbo (1994), A Review <strong>of</strong> Recent Developments in Latent Class Regression Models, Advanced methods <strong>of</strong> Marketing Research, ed. R.P. Bagozzi, 352-388. Wedel, M. and W.A. Kamakura (2000), Market Segmentation: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston. Wierenga, B. (1974), An Investigation <strong>of</strong> Brand Choice Processes, Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press. Wierenga, B. and W.F. Van Raaij (1987), “Consumentengedrag, Theorie, Analyse & Toepassingen, Leiden: Stenfert Kroese B.V., Wetenschappelijke & Educatieve Uitgevers. Wierenga, B. and P.A.M. Oude Ophuis (1997), “Marketing Decision Support Systems: Adoption, Use and Satisfaction, International Journal <strong>of</strong> Research in Marketing, 14, 3, 275- 290. Wilson, R.D., Newman, L.M., and C.H. Paksoy (1979), “On the Validity <strong>of</strong> Research Methods in Consumer Dealing Activity: An <strong>Analysis</strong> <strong>of</strong> timing Issues,” In Educators’ Conference Proceedings, eds. N. Beckwith, M. Houston, R. Mittelstaedt, K.B. Monroe, and S.Ward, 41-46, Chicago: American Marketing Association. Wind, Y. and R.E. Frank (1969), “Interproduct Household Loyalty to brands,” Journal <strong>of</strong> Marketing Research, 6, 4, 434-435. Winer, R.S. (1986), “A Reference Price Model <strong>of</strong> Brand Choice for Frequently Purchased Products,“ Journal <strong>of</strong> Consumer Research, 13, 2, 250-256. 229
Winer, R.S., Bucklin, R.E., Deighton, J., Erdem,T., Fader, P.S., Inman, J.J., Katahira, H., Lemon, K. and A. Mitchell (1994), “When Worlds Colide: The Implication <strong>of</strong> Panel Data- Based Choice Models for Consumer Behavior,” Marketing Letters, 5, 4, 383-394. Wittink, D.R., Addona, M.J., Hawkes, W.J. and J.C. Porter (1987), “SCANPRO: A Model to Measure Short-Term <strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Promotion</strong>al Activities on Brand <strong>Sales</strong>, Based on Store-Level Scanner Data”, Working Paper, Johnson Graduate School <strong>of</strong> Management, Cornell University, May. Wold, H. (1952), Demand <strong>Analysis</strong>, A Study in Econometrics, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell. Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer Perceptions <strong>of</strong> Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis <strong>of</strong> Evidence”, Journal <strong>of</strong> Marketing, 52, 3, 2-22. 230
Page 1 and 2:
LINDA H. TEUNTER Analysis</
Page 4 and 5:
Analysis o
Page 6 and 7:
Voorwoord Soms valt de appel echt n
Page 8 and 9:
Contents 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIE
Page 10 and 11:
5.4.2.3.1 Inter Purchase Time .....
Page 12 and 13:
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW 1.1 Int
Page 14 and 15:
generally generated from a smaller
Page 16 and 17:
switching, purchase acceleration, c
Page 18 and 19:
strategy change (decrease in promot
Page 20 and 21:
of promotions, or
Page 22 and 23:
characteristics are important in ex
Page 24:
Chapter 5 are applied to study the
Page 28 and 29:
2 THEORIES OF CONSUMER BUYING BEHAV
Page 30 and 31:
systematically explored the decisio
Page 32 and 33:
the part of the co
Page 34 and 35:
As mentioned before, Figure 2.3 is
Page 36 and 37:
product use coupled with the import
Page 38 and 39:
2.3.2 Stimulus-Response Model Appli
Page 40 and 41:
2.3.2.2 Operant Conditioning In ope
Page 42 and 43:
X is very popular that it will brin
Page 44 and 45:
But, in contrast, economic theory c
Page 46 and 47:
compared to a perceived benchmark -
Page 48 and 49:
High need-for-cognition (NFC) indiv
Page 50 and 51:
2.3.4.2 Literature Overview Our rev
Page 52 and 53:
The previously described research h
Page 54 and 55:
has its deficiencies. Any purchase
Page 56 and 57:
Chandon et al. 2000). But deal pron
Page 58 and 59:
2.4 Concluding Remarks Regarding th
Page 60:
stimulus-organism-response model) c
Page 63 and 64:
Shoemaker 1987). Several factors ha
Page 65 and 66:
such as display promotions. Althoug
Page 67 and 68:
3.2.3 Type of resi
Page 69 and 70:
3.2.5 Education Education links to
Page 71 and 72:
these advantages therefore could be
Page 73 and 74:
less likely to seek variety. More e
Page 75 and 76:
3.3.1 Store Loyalty Store loyalty s
Page 77 and 78:
more often (probab
Page 79 and 80:
Table 3.12 continued Hypothesis H9a
Page 81 and 82:
4.2.1 Brand Switching Brand switchi
Page 83 and 84:
involvement purchases for most cons
Page 85 and 86:
Neslin (1998), there is a great nee
Page 87 and 88:
are called “attributions.” Attr
Page 89 and 90:
and less than 2 percent by stockpil
Page 91 and 92:
into a unit sales decomposition and
Page 93 and 94:
4.3.4 Storability/Perishability Sto
Page 95 and 96:
Economic theory ignores mental deci
Page 97 and 98:
seeking (cf. Assael 1987, Desphande
Page 99 and 100:
there another factor that is relate
Page 101 and 102:
Pr(event) 90 = 1+ 1 z e − Here Z
Page 103 and 104:
5.4.2 Sales <stron
Page 105 and 106:
It represents the fraction
Page 107 and 108:
96 We measure possible time acceler
Page 109 and 110:
promotional post-promotional purcha
Page 111 and 112:
( 12) CategoryExpansion effect : 10
Page 114:
PART II EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS 103
Page 117 and 118:
more persons living together and di
Page 119 and 120:
6.4 Linking Household and Store Dat
Page 121 and 122:
Table 6.1 contains the results <str
Page 123 and 124:
The age of the sho
Page 125 and 126:
Table 6.4: Frequency distribution <
Page 128 and 129:
7 EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS ONE: DRIVERS O
Page 130 and 131:
Table 7.1: Operationalization <stro
Page 132 and 133:
during 435 shopping trips more than
Page 134 and 135:
The variables size, age, and cycle
Page 136 and 137:
7.5 Results Drivers of</str
Page 138 and 139:
esponsive the households within tha
Page 140 and 141:
Table 7.3: Relationship promotion r
Page 142 and 143:
indication that decreasing marginal
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Table 7.10: Relationship promotion
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
7.5.2.8 Variety Seeking Two intrins
Page 156 and 157:
anymore. Therefore it is concluded
Page 158 and 159:
Thus, store loyalty and promotion r
Page 160 and 161:
dummies add up to one. This implies
Page 162 and 163:
Table 7.22: Overview empirical test
Page 164 and 165:
enacting-on-impulse hypothesis and
Page 166 and 167:
Table 7.23: Summary of</str
Page 168:
Table 7.24: Correlation error coeff
Page 171 and 172:
another category? Or do households
Page 173 and 174:
and unweighted. With respect to the
Page 175 and 176:
164 In general, the average quantit
Page 177 and 178:
Purchase frequency is defined as th
Page 179 and 180:
Table 8.3: Product category rating
Page 181 and 182:
Table 8.4: Pearson correlation betw
Page 183 and 184:
We hypothesized that within impulse
Page 185 and 186:
measure (PU). Referring to Figure A
Page 187 and 188:
Table 8.6: Significant within categ
Page 189 and 190: looked at this promotional bump dec
Page 191 and 192: Table 8.8: Differences in promotion
Page 193 and 194: approach (about one third) are much
Page 195 and 196: promotions lead to large purchase t
Page 197 and 198: studies. Promotion
Page 199 and 200: Promotional extra
Page 201 and 202: categories revealed that the strong
Page 203 and 204: degree. When households switch bran
Page 205 and 206: specific sales promotion reaction m
Page 207 and 208: increasing (Inman and Winer 1998),
Page 209 and 210: indirectly from promotional purchas
Page 211 and 212: quantity downward for potato chips.
Page 213 and 214: 9.2.2.3 Deal Proneness With respect
Page 215 and 216: 204 related to promotion response.
Page 217 and 218: influenced by out-of</stron
Page 219 and 220: Andrews, K.Z. (1997), “Do Marketi
Page 221 and 222: Blattberg, R.C., Eppen, G.D. and J.
Page 223 and 224: Chintagunta, P. (1993), “Investig
Page 225 and 226: East, R. and K. Hammond (1996), “
Page 227 and 228: Gupta, Sachin and P.K. Chintagunta
Page 229 and 230: Kahn, B.E., Morrison, D.G.and G.P.
Page 231 and 232: Lattin, J.M. and R.E. Bucklin (1989
Page 233 and 234: McAlister, L. and E. Pessemier (198
Page 235 and 236: Petty, R.E. and J.T. Cacioppo (1981
Page 237 and 238: Shimp, T.A. (1990). Promoti
Page 239: Van Trijp, H.C.M. and J.B.E.M. Stee
Page 244 and 245: APPENDIX A4: Research Overview Tabl
Page 246: Table A4.1 continued Article Promot
Page 249 and 250: � Size of munici
Page 251 and 252: Table A7.1 continued Symbol Descrip
Page 253 and 254: Table A7.2: Data legitimacy check (
Page 255 and 256: Table A7.3: Results binary logistic
Page 257 and 258: Table A7.4: Results interacting wit
Page 259 and 260: Table A7.5: Results age and size no
Page 261 and 262: Table A7.5 continued Variable B S.E
Page 263 and 264: Table A8.1 continued Impulse BS TA
Page 265 and 266: Table A8.2 continued Number <strong
Page 267 and 268: Table A8.3: Relative occurrence and
Page 269 and 270: Figure A8.2: Decomposing total prom
Page 271 and 272: interessante aanbieding is. Combina
Page 273 and 274: aantalmerken in een categorie en im
Page 276 and 277: ERASMUS RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF MANAG
Page 278 and 279: Title: Beyond Generics;A closer loo
Page 280 and 281: Title: Planning and Control Concept
show all

Analysis of Sales Promotion Effects on Household Purchase Behavior

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?