MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3146840541 · doi:10.1111/poms.13417

The Dual Impact of Product Line Length on Consumer Choice

2021· article· en· W3146840541 on OpenAlexaff
Weilin Wang, Demetrios Vakratsas

Bibliographic record

VenueProduction and Operations Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)Product lineExtant taxonDual (grammatical number)Product (mathematics)EconomicsLine (geometry)EconometricsMicroeconomicsMarketingBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although extant literature has argued for both positive and negative effects of product line length on choice, i.e. a “dual impact,” such a possibility has not been empirically investigated. This is the first study to address this issue, using a multiple discrete choice model for horizontally differentiated goods. The authors argue that the dual impact of product line length is due to competing effects of the two constituent dimensions of product line structure: a positive effect of product line width (total number of product configurations offered) and a negative effect of average line depth (average number of SKUs per product configuration). They also examine the moderating role of choice diversification propensity manifested in multiple discreteness. An empirical application in the potato chip market confirms the expectations regarding the competing effects of the two product line dimensions and hence the dual impact of product line length. Furthermore, the negative effect of average line depth is found to be more pronounced for households with higher choice diversification propensity. These findings are not only novel but also meaningful since simulations show that the corresponding effects influence product line management decisions and new product design.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProduction and Operations ManagementSame topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207