Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Psychology of Habit

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.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Seetharaman allows for variety seeking in a similar way if ρ < 0. In such a situation, consumers would buy any other product with a fixed probability and buy according to their utility with the remaining probability. However, the estimates support habit over variety seeking so we simplify the exposition here.

References

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beggs, A., & Klemperer, P. (1992). Multi-period competition with switching costs. Econometrica, 60(3), 651–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabral, L. (2009). Small switching costs lead to lower prices. Marketing Science, 46(4), 449–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabral, L. (2012). Switching costs and equilibrium prices. Mimeo: New York University.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. (1997). Paying customers to switch. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 6(4), 877–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doganoglu, T. (2010). Switching costs, experience goods, and dynamic price competition. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 8(2), 167–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdem, T. (1996). A dynamic analysis of market structure based on panel data. Marketing Science, 15(4), 359–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erdem, T., & Sun, B. (2001). Testing for choice dynamics in panel data. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 19(2), 142–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, J. (1986). A note on inertia in market share. Economics Letters, 21(1), 73–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Farrell, J., & Shapiro, C. (1988). Dynamic competition with switching costs. RAND Journal of Economics, 19, 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, F. M., Kahn, B. E., & McAlister, L. (1992). Market share response when consumers seek variety. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 227–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R. E. (1962). Brand choice as a probability process. The Journal of Business, 35(1), 43–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, A. (2006). State dependence at internet portals. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 15(2), 317–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guadagni, P. M., & Little, J. D. C. (1983). A logit model of brand choice calibrated on scanner data. Marketing Science, 2(3), 203–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handel, B. (2013). Adverse selection and inertia in health insurance markets: When nudging hurts. The American Economic Review, 103(7), 2643–2682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herniter, J. D., & Magee, J. F. (1961). Customer behavior as a Markov process. Operations Research, 9(1), 105–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Klemperer, P. (1987a). Markets with consumer switching costs. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102(2), 375–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klemperer, P. (1987b). The competitiveness of markets with switching costs. RAND Journal of Economics, 18(1), 138–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Massy, W. F. (1966). Order and homogeneity of family specific brand-switching processes. Journal of Marketing Research, 3(1), 48–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, D. (2014). Switching to variety seeking: the effects of consumer variety seeking on product line strategies. Mimeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padilla, A. J. (1995). Revisiting dynamic duopoly with consumer switching costs. Journal of Economic Theory, 67(2), 520–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlidis, P., & Ellickson, P. B. (2017). Implications of parent brand inertia for multiproduct pricing. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 15(4), 369–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sajeesh, S., & Raju, J. S. (2010). Positioning and pricing in a variety seeking market. Management Science, 56(6), 949–961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seetharaman, P. B. (2004). Modeling multiple sources of state dependence in random utility models: A distributed lag approach. Marketing Science, 23(2), 263–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seetharaman, P. B., Ainslie, A., & Chintagunta, P. K. (1999). Investigating household state dependence effects across categories. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(4), 488–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seetharaman, P. B., & Che, H. (2009). Price competition in markets with consumer variety seeking. Marketing Science, 28(3), 403–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, S., Misra, S., & Horsky, D. (2012). Disentangling preferences and learning in brand choice models. Marketing Science, 31(1), 115–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shum, M. (2004). Does advertising overcome brand loyalty? Evidence from the breakfast-cereal market. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 13(2), 241–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Styan, G. P. H., & Smith Jr., H. (1964). Markov chains applied to marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 1(1), 50–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (2003). Supplier surfing: Competition and consumer behavior in subscription markets. RAND Journal of Economics, 34(2), 223–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villas-Boas, J. M. (2004). Consumer learning, brand loyalty, and competition. Marketing Science, 23(1), 134–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villas-Boas, J. M. (2006). Dynamic competition with experience goods. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 15(1), 37–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villas-Boas, J. M. (2015). A short survey on switching costs and dynamic competition. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32, 219–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Weizsäcker, C. C. (1984). The costs of substitution. Econometrica, 52(5), 1085–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeithammer, R., & Thomadsen, R. (2013). Vertical differentiation with variety-seeking consumers. Management Science, 59(2), 390–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Olin Business School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Raphael Thomadsen & P. B. (Seethu) Seetharaman

Authors
  1. Raphael Thomadsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. B. (Seethu) Seetharaman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raphael Thomadsen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK

    Bas Verplanken

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Thomadsen, R., (Seethu) Seetharaman, P.B. (2018). The Strategic Effects of State-Dependent Consumer Preferences: The Roles of Habits and Variety Seeking. In: Verplanken, B. (eds) The Psychology of Habit. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97529-0_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation