1996
DOI: 10.2307/1243701
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Demand Response to Advertising in the Australian Meat Industry

Abstract: The implications of model specification choices for the measurement of demand response to advertising are examined using Australian data. Single-equation models versus complete systems and alternative corrections for autocorrelation are evaluated. Competing advertising efforts by two producer bodies are included. Across all specifications, the evidence on advertising effects is fairly consistent. In the preferred model, the only statistically significant effects of advertising are for Australian Meat and Lives… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0
5

Year Published

1999
1999
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
34
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…At each Monte Carlo iteration robust starting values were obtained using the non-derivative optimisation method Nelder-Meade, which were then fed into the Newton-Raphson optimiser in GAUSS for final coefficient estimates. 19 The first-order autocorrelation correction followed Berndt and Savin (1975), which has been adopted by Piggott et al (1996) and Holt and Goodwin (1997), specifying a common correlation coefficient across the system of equations. The autocorrelation coefficient, ρ, is positive and significant (using the log-likelihood values of the models with first-order autocorrelation correction and without the LR statistic is −2[(−536.2411)−(−509.7967)] = 33.46 > 3.84 critical value with 1 degree of freedom at the 0.05 level).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At each Monte Carlo iteration robust starting values were obtained using the non-derivative optimisation method Nelder-Meade, which were then fed into the Newton-Raphson optimiser in GAUSS for final coefficient estimates. 19 The first-order autocorrelation correction followed Berndt and Savin (1975), which has been adopted by Piggott et al (1996) and Holt and Goodwin (1997), specifying a common correlation coefficient across the system of equations. The autocorrelation coefficient, ρ, is positive and significant (using the log-likelihood values of the models with first-order autocorrelation correction and without the LR statistic is −2[(−536.2411)−(−509.7967)] = 33.46 > 3.84 critical value with 1 degree of freedom at the 0.05 level).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such cross-commodity effects have been noted in previous studies since the earliest work on commodity advertising (e.g., Hoos;Parish;De Boer;Piggott et al 1996), but until recently have not been analyzed. Several recent studies have drawn attention to the beggar-thy-neighbor aspect of commodity promotion programs, and its potential importance, but they all treated the advertising expenditure and levy as exogenous (e.g., Piggott, Piggott, and Wright;Piggott 1997;Alston, Chalfant, and Piggott 2000;and Kinnucan and Miao).…”
mentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Assim, sugerem que sejam incluídas variáveis capazes de captar o nível de informação dos consumidores sobre aspectos de saúde relacionados ao consumo de carnes, conveniência, qualidade do alimento, grau de promoção e propaganda e características demográficas dos consumidores. Diante da indisponibilidade imediata de variá-veis como estas no Brasil e objetivando minimizar os problemas advindos da omissão de dinâmica nos modelos e da potencial não consideração de não estacionaridade determinísticas nas séries, adotou-se a estratégia sugerida e utilizada por Piggott et al (1996) …”
Section: Preços Das Carnes E Gastos Com Outros Bens De Consumounclassified