The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Development and Testing of a Model of Consideration Set Composition
Abstract
The authors develop a model of consideration set composition. The approach taken is to compare the marginal expected benefits of including an additional brand in the consideration set with its associated costs of consideration. From an expression of the utility that a brand needs to gain membership in an existing consideration set, the authors derive an expression for set composition and optimal set size. They develop a measurement method to test the model at the individual level and apply it to the ready-to-eat cereal market. The model is tested in two ways. First, the utility function is calibrated at the individual level and the model is used to predict consideration of existing brands. The calibrated model also is used to forecast individual consideration of three new product concepts. Second, the predictive ability of a two-stage model of consideration and choice is tested against a traditional one-stage choice model. The authors conclude with a discussion of management implications of the model in terms of auditing currently available brands and new product management.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids
Häubl, G., & Trifts, V. (2000) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.19.1.4.15178 · Cited by 1,731
Tried and tested: The impact of online hotel reviews on consumer consideration
Vermeulen, I. E., & Seegers, D. (2009) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.04.008 · Cited by 1,311
Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis
Chernev, A., Böckenholt, U., & Goodman, J. (2015) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002 · Cited by 858
Opportunity Cost Consideration
Spiller, S. A. (2011) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/660045 · Cited by 236
Structural Estimation of the Effect of Out-of-Stocks
Musalem, A., Olivares, M., Bradlow, E. T., Terwiesch, C., & Corsten, D. (2010) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1100.1170 · Cited by 196
Advertising benefits from ethical Artificial Intelligence algorithmic purchase decision pathways
Rodgers, W., & Nguyen, T. (2022) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05048-7 · Cited by 137
Consumer search: What can we learn from pre-purchase data?
Honka, E., Seiler, S., & Ursu, R. (2024) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2024.02.003 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- Roberts, J. H., & Lattin, J. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1991-11
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 429-440
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W1988540086
- Cited by
- 683
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 26.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.