Skip to main content
Log in

The effects of market structure characteristics on competitive reaction intensity: A longitudinal analysis

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores the effects of market structure characteristics and exogenous market interventions on competitive reaction intensity over time. It is found that moderate growth rate and moderate concentration induce greater competitive reactions. The effect of the exogenous intervention in the industry studied appears to have a dampening impact on competitive responses. Our research inquiry addresses some issues raised on competition, in general, by Weitz (1985) and specifically on competitive responses by Robinson (1988) and Gatignon, Anderson, and Helsen (1989).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • CableJ. (1972). “Market Structure, Advertising Policy and Intermarket Differences in Advertising Intensity,” in K.Cowling (Ed.)Market Structure and Corporate Behavior, London: Gray Mills.

    Google Scholar 

  • ComanorWilliam S., and Thomas A.Wilson. (1974).Advertising and Market Power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ComanorWilliam S. (1967), “Advertising, Market Structure, and Performance,”Review of Economics and Statistics 49 (November), 423–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CooperLee, and MasaoNakanishi. (1988).Market Share Analysis, Cambridge, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • CowlingK., and D.Mueller. (1978). “The Social Costs of Monopoly Power,”Economic Journal 88, 727–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • EskinGerald J. (1975). ‘A Case for Test Market Experiments,”Journal of Advertising Research 15, 2 (April), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • FamaEugene F., and A. B.Laffer. (1972). “The Number of Firms and Competition,”American Economic Review 62, 670–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • GatignonHubert. (1984). “Competition as a Moderator of the Effect of Advertising on Sales,”Journal of Marketing Research 21 (November), 387–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GatignonHubert, ErinAnderson, and KristiaanHelsen. (1989). “Competitive Reactions to Market Entry: Explaining Interfirm Differences,”Journal of Marketing Research 26 (February), 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HanssensDominique M. (1980). “Market Response, Competitive Behavior and Time Series Analysis,”Journal of Marketing Research 17 (November), 470–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HarriganKathryn R. (1988).Managing Mature Businesses: Restructuring Declining Industries and Revitalizing Troubled Operations, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • HauserJohn R., and Steven M.Shugan. (1983). “Defensive Marketing Strategies,”Marketing Science 2, (Fall), 319–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HolakSusan L., and Srinivas K. Reddy. (1986). “Effects of a Television and Radio Advertising Ban: A Study of the Cigarette Industry,”Journal of Marketing 50 (November), 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KaldorN., and R.Silverman. (1948).A Statistical Analysis of Advertising Expenditures and the Revenue of the Press, London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • LambinJean Jacques, Phillipe A.Naert, and A.Buletz (1975). “Optimal Marketing Behavior in Oligopoly,”European Economic Review 6, 105–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LandesW. M., and R. A.Posner. (1981). “Market Power in Antitrust Cases,”Harvard Law Review 94, 937–996.

    Google Scholar 

  • MaxwellJ. C. (1982).Historical Trends in the Cigarette Industry. New York: Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Media/Scope. (1968). February, 95.

  • NelsonPhillip. (1974). “Advertising As Information,“Journal of Political Economy 81, (July/August), 729–754.

    Google Scholar 

  • NelsonPhillip. (1970). “Information and Consumer Behavior,”Journal of Political Economy 78, (March/April), 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NelsonPhillip. (1975). “The Economic Consequences of Advertising,”Journal of Business 48, (April), 213–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PorterMichael. (1980).Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raju, Jagmohan S., V. Srinivasan, and Rajiv Lal. (1988). “The Effects of Brand Loyalty on Competitive Price Promotional Strategies,” UCLA Graduate School of Management Working Paper.

  • ReekieD. (1970). “Some Problems Associated with the Marketing of Ethical Pharmaceutical Products,”Journal of Industrial Economics 49, 33–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • RobinsonWilliam. (1988). “Marketing Mix Reactions to Entry,”Marketing Science 7 (Fall), 368–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, Richard. (1987). “Standards for Dominants Firm Conduct: What Can Economics Contribute?” in DonaldHay and JohnVickers (Eds.)The Economics of Market Dominance, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 61–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • ShawR. and P.Simpson. (1985). “The Monopolies Commission and the Persistence of Monopoly,”Journal of Industrial Economics 34, 355–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • ShepherdW. (1975).The Treatment of Market Power, New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SuttonC. J. (1974). “Advertising, Concentration and Competition,”Economic Journal 84, 56–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • SchererF. M. (1982).Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • TelserLester G. (1964). “Advertising and Competition,”Journal of Political Economy 72 (December), 537–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VernonJ. M. (1971). “Concentration, Promotion and Market Share Stability in the Pharmaceutical Industry,”Journal of Industrial Economics 50, 246–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • VickersJohn, and DonaldHay. (1987). “The Economics of Market Dominance,” in DonaldHay and JohnVickers (Eds.),The Economics of Market Dominance, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • WatersonMichael. (1984).Economic Theory of the Industry, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WeitzBarton A. (1985). “Introduction to Special Issue on Competition in Marketing,”Journal of Marketing Research 17, 2 (April), 39–42.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

The authors express their appreciation to Lee Cooper, Imran Currim, Hubert Gatignon, Avijit Ghosh, Jagmohan Singh Raju and Bill Robinson for their helpful comments and to Mark Parry for his computer programming assistance. The authors gratefully acknowledge research support from the College of Business Administration, University of Georgia, and Graduate School of Management, Rutgers University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reddy, S.K., Holak, S.L. The effects of market structure characteristics on competitive reaction intensity: A longitudinal analysis. Market Lett 2, 293–308 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02404079

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02404079

Key words

Navigation