Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 478

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The “Shopping Basket”: A Model for Multicategory Purchase Incidence Decisions

Manchanda, Puneet, Ansari, Asim, Gupta, Sunil·1999·Marketing Science

Abstract

Consumers make multicategory decisions in a variety of contexts such as choice of multiple categories during a shopping trip or mail-order purchasing. The choice of one category may affect the selection of another category due to the complementary nature (e.g., cake mix and cake frosting) of the two categories. Alternatively, two categories may co-occur in a shopping basket not because they are complementary but because of similar purchase cycles (e.g., beer and diapers) or because of a host of other unobserved factors. While complementarity gives managers some control over consumers' buying behavior (e.g., a change in the price of cake mix could change the purchase probability of cake frosting), co-occurrence or co-incidence is less controllable. Other factors that may affect multi-category choice may be (unobserved) household preferences or (observed) household demographics. We also argue that not accounting for these three factors simultaneously could lead to erroneous inferences. We then develop a conceptual framework that incorporates complementarity, co-incidence and heterogeneity (both observed and unobserved) as the factors that could lead to multi-category choice. We then translate this framework into a model of multi-category choice. Our model is based on random utility theory and allows for simultaneous, interdependent choice of many items. This model, the multi variate probit model, is implemented in a Hierarchical Bayes framework. The hierarchy consists of three levels. The first level captures the choice of items for the shopping basket during a shopping trip. The second level captures differences across households and the third level specifies the priors for the unknown parameters. We generalize some recent advances in Markov chain Monte Carlo methods in order to estimate the model. Specifically, we use a substitution sampler which incorporates techniques such as the Metropolis Hit-and-Run algorithm and the Gibbs Sampler. The model is estimated on four categories (cake mix, cake frosting, fabric detergent and fabric softener) using multicategory panel data. The results disentangle the complementarity and co-incidence effects. The complementarity results show that pricing and promotional changes in one category affect purchase incidence in related product categories. In general, the cross-price and cross-promotion effects are smaller than the own-price and own-promotions effects. The cross-effects are also asymmetric across pairs of categories, i.e., related category pairs may be characterized as having a “primary” and a “secondary” category. Thus these results provide a more complete description of the effects of promotional changes by examining them both within and across categories. The co-incidence results show the extent of the relationship between categories that arises from uncontrollable and unobserved factors. These results are useful since they provide insights into a general structure of dependence relationships across categories. The heterogeneity results show that observed demographic factors such as family size influence the intrinsic category preference of households. Larger family sizes also tend to make households more price sensitive for both the primary and secondary categories. We find that price sensitivities across categories are not highly correlated at the household level. We also find some evidence that intrinsic preferences for cake mix and cake frosting are more closely related than preferences for fabric detergent and fabric softener. We compare our model with a series of null models using both estimation and holdout samples. We show that both complementarity and co-incidence play a significant role in predicting multicategory choice. We also show how many single-category models used in conjunction may not be good predictors of joint choice. Our results are likely to be of interest to retailers and manufacturers trying to optimize pricing and promotion strategies across many categories as well as in designing micromarketing strategies. We illustrate some of these benefits by carrying out an analysis which shows that the “true” impact of complementarity and co-incidence on profitability is significant in a retail setting. Our model can also be applied to other domains. The combination of item interdependence and individual household level estimates may be of particular interest to database marketers in building customized “cross-selling” strategies in the direct mail and financial service industries.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mksc.18.2.95

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. 10.1287/mksc.17.2.91 · DOI
  2. 10.1080/01621459.1993.10476321 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.2307/3152175 · DOI
  4. 10.1287/mksc.17.1.29 · DOI
  5. 10.1287/mksc.17.1.66 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Bodapati Anand . The impact of out-of-store advertising on store sales. (1996) . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
  7. 10.2307/3172570 · DOI
  8. 10.2307/1390645 · DOI
  9. 10.1093/biomet/85.2.347 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Chib S., 1995, Amer. Statistician, 49, 327, 10.1080/00031305.1995.10476177 · DOI
  11. 10.2307/3151929 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/0022-4359(94)90037-X · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.2307/1251759 · DOI
  14. Geweke J., 1991, Comput. Sci. Statist.: Proc. Twenty-Third Sympos. Interface, 571
  15. Greene William H., 1997, Econometric Analysis
  16. 10.1093/biomet/57.1.97 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.2307/3152107 · DOI
  18. Kahn Barbara E., 1992, Marketing Lett., 68, 294
  19. 10.1287/mksc.7.1.1 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1016/0304-4076(94)90064-7 · DOI
  21. 10.1086/209450 · DOI
  22. Meyer Robert J., 1991, Handbook of Consumer Behavior, 85
  23. 10.2307/1251957 · DOI
  24. 10.2307/1251928 · DOI
  25. 10.1086/209182 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Raftery A. E., 1995, Bayesian Statistics, 4, 641
  27. 10.1287/mksc.11.3.207 · DOI
  28. 10.1086/209480 · DOI
  29. 10.1023/A:1007960529932 · DOI
  30. 10.1086/209348 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.2307/1252234 · DOI

Cited by

See all 478

Metadata

Authors
Manchanda, P., Ansari, A., & Gupta, S.
Venue
Marketing Science
Published
1999-05
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
95-114
ISSN
  • 0732-2399 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-548X
OpenAlex
W2153227754
Cited by
478
References
2
FWCI
27.35
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The “Shopping Basket”: A Model for Multicategory Purchase Incidence Decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mksc.18.2.95
The paper
Manchanda, P., Ansari, A., & Gupta, S. (1999). The “Shopping Basket”: A Model for Multicategory Purchase Incidence Decisions. Marketing Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.18.2.95

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.