Does one trust judgement fit all? Linking theory and empirics

Copyright @ 2010 The Authors. This is the accepted version of the following article: Fisher, J., Van Heerde, J. and Tucker, A. (2010), Does One Trust Judgement Fit All? Linking Theory and Empirics. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 12: 161–188, which has been published in final form at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2009.00401.x/abstract.Few questions in political science have received more attention in recent times than the role of trust in democracy, democratic government and political participation. In Britain this has become a particular concern as levels of democratic engagement in traditional politics have declined, exacerbated by media reports of politicians' untrustworthy behaviour. A common feature of previous empirical work on political trust is that trust is treated as a single theoretical concept. Scholars have assumed that trust operates in a similar fashion across different political institutions—that citizens' trust mechanisms are the same for trusting parliament, the prime minister or the European Union. As a consequence, the operationalisation of trust has generally been through a single measure. In this article we draw on recent research from political theory, where different forms of judgements whether to trust—strategic, moral and deliberative—have been conceptualised, to argue that trust judgements may vary in application and significance depending upon the institution under examination. Using specially designed data sets generated from YouGov's weekly omnibus and the British Election Study's Continuous Monitoring Panel, we operationalise these three forms of trust judgements to examine trust in two British institutions—political parties and politicians. We find, as hypothesised, that different forms of trust judgements are of differing significance depending upon the institution under consideration

Do Loyalty Programs Really Enhance Behavioral Loyalty? An Empirical Analysis Accounting for Self-Selecting Members

One of the pressing issues in marketing is whether loyalty programs really enhance behavioral loyalty. Loyalty program members may have a much higher share-of-wallet at the firm with the loyalty program than non-members have, but this does not necessarily imply that loyalty programs are effective. Loyal customers may select themselves to become members in order to benefit from the program. Since this implies that program membership is endogenous, we estimate models for both the membership decision (using instrumental variables) and for the effect of membership on share-of-wallet, our measure of behavioral loyalty. We use panel data from a representative sample of Dutch households who report their loyalty program memberships for all seven loyalty programs in grocery retailing as well as their expenditures at each of the 20 major supermarket chains. We find a small positive yet significant effect of loyalty program membership on share-of-wallet. This effect is seven times smaller than is suggested by a naïve model that ignores the endogeneity of program membership. The predictive validity of the proposed model is much better than for the naïve model. Our results show that creating loyalty program membership is a crucial step to enhance share-of-wallet, and we provide guidelines how to achieve this.Attraction models;Endogeneity;Grocery retailing;Loyalty programs;Tobit-II model

Do Loyalty Programs Enhance Behavioral Loyalty: An Empirical Analysis Accounting for Program Design and Competitive Effects

This paper studies the effects of loyalty programs on share-of-wallet using market-wide household panel data on supermarket purchases.We find that loyalty programs relate positively to share-of-wallet, but the programs differ in effectiveness and some are ineffective.Both a saving component and a multi-vendor structure enhance the effectiveness of a loyalty program, but high discounts do not lead to higher share-of-wallets.Further, if households have multiple loyalty cards, the effectiveness of a specific loyalty program is much smaller.The positive loyalty program effects on share-of-wallet entail substantial additional customer revenues.However, given the high number of loyalty programs already available in the market, our model predicts that a new loyalty program introduction will only lead to small effects on share-of-wallet.loyalty;marketing;retailing

Semiparametric analysis to estimate the deal effect curve

The marketing literature suggests several phenomena that may contribute to the shape of the relationship between sales and price discounts. These phenomena can produce severe nonlinearities and interactions in the curves, and we argue that those are best captured with a flexible approach. Since a fully nonparametric regression model suffers from the curse of dimensionality, we propose a semiparametric regression model. Store-level sales over time is modeled as a nonparametric function of own-and cross-item price discounts, and a parametric function of other predictors (all indicator variables). We compare the predictive validity of the semiparametric model with that of two parametric benchmark models and obtain better performance on average. The results for three product categories indicate a.o. threshold- and saturation effects for both own- and cross-item temporary price cuts. We also show how the own-item curve depends on other items’ price discounts (flexible interaction effects). In a separate analysis, we show how the shape of the deal effect curve depends on own-item promotion signals. Our results indicate that prevailing methods for the estimation of deal effects on sales are inadequate.

How Promotions Work: SCAN*PRO-Based Evolutionary Model Building

We provide a rationale for evolutionary model building. The basic idea is that to enhance user acceptance it is important that one begins with a relatively simple model. Simplicity is desired so that managers understand models. As a manager uses the model and builds up experience with this decision aid, she will realize its shortcomings. The model will then be expanded and will lead to the increase of complexity. Evolutionary model building also stimulates the generalization of marketing knowledge. We illustrate this by discussing different extensions of the SCAN*PRO model. The purpose of published model extensions is to increase the knowledge about "how promotions work" and to provide support for more complex decisions. We summarize the generated knowledge about how promotions work, based on this process.We provide a rationale for evolutionary model building. The basic idea is that to enhance user acceptance it is important that one begins with a relatively simple model. Simplicity is desired so that managers understand models. As a manager uses the model and builds up experience with this decision aid, she will realize its shortcomings. The model will then be expanded and will lead to the increase of complexity. Evolutionary model building also stimulates the generalization of marketing knowledge. We illustrate this by discussing different extensions of the SCAN*PRO model. The purpose of published model extensions is to increase the knowledge about "how promotions work" and to provide support for more complex decisions. We summarize the generated knowledge about how promotions work, based on this process.Articles published in or submitted to a Journal without I

Do Loyalty Programs Enhance Behavioral Loyalty:An Empirical Analysis Accounting for Program Design and Competitive Effects

This paper studies the effects of loyalty programs on share-of-wallet using market-wide household panel data on supermarket purchases.We find that loyalty programs relate positively to share-of-wallet, but the programs differ in effectiveness and some are ineffective.Both a saving component and a multi-vendor structure enhance the effectiveness of a loyalty program, but high discounts do not lead to higher share-of-wallets.Further, if households have multiple loyalty cards, the effectiveness of a specific loyalty program is much smaller.The positive loyalty program effects on share-of-wallet entail substantial additional customer revenues.However, given the high number of loyalty programs already available in the market, our model predicts that a new loyalty program introduction will only lead to small effects on share-of-wallet.