MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385649803 · doi:10.1177/00222429231196575

Dual Branding by National Brand Manufacturers: Drivers and Outcomes

2023· article· en· W4385649803 on OpenAlexafffund
Yu Ma, Kusum L. Ailawadi, Mercedes Martos‐Partal, Óscar González‐Benito

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marketing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Asuntos Económicos y Transformación Digital, Gobierno de España
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)BusinessSupply chainMarketingScope (computer science)DyadDual roleAdvertisingIndustrial organizationPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is the first generalizable empirical analysis of dual branding, that is, the supply of private labels (PLs) by national brand (NB) manufacturers. The authors compile a unique data set combining the identity of PL suppliers in over 260 packaged goods categories with multiple years of scanner data in the Spanish grocery market to offer several contributions. First, they provide new descriptive insights on the prevalence of dual branding in categories where the manufacturer does and does not have NBs, the longevity of PL supply arrangements, and the differences in PL sourcing across retailers. Second, they integrate the literature on motivators and dissuaders of dual branding and test the impact of relevant manufacturer, retailer, and dyad characteristics on PL supply in NB and non-NB categories. The results reveal a more nuanced empirical reality than is evident from prior research regarding the role of multicategory scope, fighter brands, NB differentiation, and size and positioning of the retailer's PL. Third, they examine the outcomes of PL supply for the NBs of dual branders and find that starting (terminating) PL supply to a retailer significantly benefits (hurts) the relative distribution depth but not the relative share of the dual brander's NBs at that retailer.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MarketingSame topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207