Search results

This study aims to use a holistic approach to empirically examine the direct and indirect relationships of both core and supporting consumer-based brand equity (CBBE) dimensions from students’ perspectives and the underlying impact they have on building a robust university brand equity. It also tests whether student perceptions of the importance of the brand equity constructs significantly differ based on demographics.

The study adopts the core and supporting university brand equity dimensions that have been tested for reliability and validity in prior research. Data were collected at a major university in the USA. The study used judgment sampling to carefully select a targeted sample of various colleges and class levels. A total of 439 useable surveys were collected.

The results of partial least squares–structural equation modeling reveal significant relationships between both core and supporting brand equity dimensions. The core brand equity dimensions include brand awareness, perceived quality, brand association, brand trust, learning environment, emotional environment, university reputation and brand loyalty. The supporting brand equity dimensions include library services, dining services, residence hall and physical facilities. Significant direct and/or indirect relationships were found between the core and supporting CBBE dimensions. The demographic variables of gender, semester standing and living arrangement also influence the importance of some of the core and supporting dimensions.

The results suggest that females, freshman and students living on-campus require specific attention in higher education. For a better representation and understanding of the university student population, we recommend that future studies use probability sampling and multiple universities for cross-validation.

Using the brand ecosystem framework, this is the first comprehensive study testing the relationships between both core and supporting CBBE dimensions in higher education. The study offers valuable insights to university stakeholders for building a strong university brand. It also confirms that the measures of the CBBE brand equity dimensions are valid and are applicable to other higher education institutions.

The purpose of this paper is to identify brand dimensions of tourism products and places that most influence the perspective of potential travelers.

The study was conducted in North America by online survey (n = 4,000), using a multi-product brand measurement model to assess a competitive set of 100 tourism brands according to 54 attributes. Factor analysis produced nine dimensions that vary in their degree of influence by both product category and level of place.

Country brands are most influenced by the virtual dream dimension as potential travelers explore destinations online, provincial/state brands are more influenced by the trust factor of the comfort zone and corporate citizen dimensions and, at the city level, influential brands are big and bold.

The study contributes an understanding of brand influence that crosses tourism product and place categories. While 100 brands are a good sample, they are a fraction of the market. In future, the methodology can be applied to understand selective bundles of brands that comprise any holistic tourist experience.

A better understanding of the factors that influence potential travelers’ brand perceptions is valuable to marketers, particularly for destinations offering a mix of product and place experiences.

Much of tourism brand research is limited to one sub-sector. This paper extends the research by identifying brand dimensions across products (i.e. attractions, lodging, transportation, online travel agents) and destinations (i.e. city, province/state, country) in one study. Additionally, new dimensions, “Connectivity” and “Virtual Dream”, reflect the significance of online planning and purchase in the current travel.

Unlike prior consumer-based brand equity (CBBE) research that examines well-known brands in different product categories, the purpose of this paper is to focus on the within-product category differences in terms of the sources of CBBE.

To facilitate the comparison, the paper proposes a hybrid measurement model of CBBE that systematically integrates various existing CBBE dimensions and examines the substantive difference among master brands and their sub-brands within a product category. The model distinguishes the latent CBBE construct from its dimensions, and separates its formative (causes of CBBE) from its reflective (effects of CBBE) dimensions, based on their causal relationship with the construct.

The paper collects CBBE data for multiple soft drink master brands and sub-brands. The paper finds significant differences among them and provides a detailed view that has not been revealed to the marketers before.

The paper not only examines a more realistic context for consumers’ marketplace choice but also is more relevant to brand managers who closely monitor their direct competitors’ performance.

Destination brand equity is a recent line of enquiry within the academic community. The topic is still not well understood from a theoretical standpoint. This chapter attempts to frame the conceptual question of how to develop brand equity by providing some theoretical constructs for the nature of destination. Brand characteristics with respect to tangible and experiential products are examined, followed by the identification of its dimensions. Awareness, image, loyalty, quality, and value are identified as different dimensions existing within destination brands. Research that has dealt with these dimensions is discussed, with suggestions on how to build brand equity using market characteristics and their relationship to the different dimensions. Case studies are used to illustrate some of the main points from the theoretical discourse, including the issue of who controls brand identity under different development scenarios.

Past work on the role of brands in the acceptance of organic products is partial and inconclusive. Research has failed to examine the consumer sense-making process underpinning fit assessment, despite the centrality of this assessment in the acceptance of line extensions. This study reconceptualizes the fit construct, showing the relationship of the fit dimensions (noncompensatory) and contributes to the literature with a deeper understanding of the role of a brand's association in the assessment process, which has been poorly examined in the past.

Grounded theory was used to unearth the process followed by consumers to assess the fit of organic line extensions. The study was based on 14 in-depth interviews.

The findings show that the dimensions of fit that consumers consider in assessing organic line extensions depend on the schema used in the assessment process. Moreover, it demonstrates that these dimensions have disparate structural relationships with one another, depending on consumers' previous commitment to organic products. Finally, the paper identifies three possible behavioral reactions by consumers toward organic line extensions.

The main limitation of this research concerns the settings in which it was developed. Therefore, and as stated by Strauss and Corbin (1990) the model applies to the situation analyzed and not to others. Future research could study if there are cultural differences in the assessment process of an organic line extension. Moreover, the contribution presented in this paper needs further empirical testing; specifically, the configuration of dimensions needed to accept an organic line extension and the relationship among dimensions.

This paper contributes to the literature by studying the impact of brand association on assessing an organic line extension and reconceptualizing the fit construct by showing the dimensions and the relationship between them that are not additive to the overall fit, as shown in past literature. Additionally, it provides a guide to brands wishing to launch an organic product using a line extension strategy and the potential implications for the parent brand that should be considered.

Despite the growing consensus that consumers extensively use online reviews and that negative reviews can significantly damage brand equity, it remains uncertain whether negative online reviews that focus on different aspects of a service have a similar or differential effect on brand equity. This study aims to fill this gap and explores the mediating role of emotional contagion and what kind of response helps better deter their negative effect.

This research is conducted through a one-panel study and three experimental studies. SAS enterprise miner is used for text mining analysis and Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Process macro models are used to analyze the experimental data.

Negative reviews related to the tangibility, responsiveness and empathy dimensions have a more detrimental effect on brand equity than negative reviews related to the assurance and reliability dimensions. The results also provide evidence that emotional contagion is more prevalent when consumers read reviews that are specific to the empathy and responsiveness dimensions. Finally, accommodative responses from the service provider are more effective in deterring the effect of a negative online review on brand equity.

The generalizability of this study is limited to the restaurant and hotel industry.

The findings will also help the brand manager in understanding the comparative effect of service quality-specific negative reviews on brand equity and also the type of responses that brand managers should give to negative reviews.

Despite online reviews receiving increased attention in academic research, Service quality (SERVQUAL) dimension-specific reviews have not been studied until now. This study contributes to the service quality-related literature by providing evidence that not all negative online reviews related to different Service quality (SERVQUAL) dimensions equally affect brand equity.

As the importance of brands is realised, so too is the importance of research in this area. However, to date, a number of branding models have been developed that lack empirical testing, are derived from the perspective of brand practitioners, and pay little attention to the branding of services. This study seeks consumer‐based information via qualitative methods regarding brand dimensions that hold meaning to consumers for both branded products and branded services. The results indicate a number of key dimensions to be such as core product/service, experience with brand, image of user, important to consumers for both goods and services. Dimensions such as feelings, and self‐image congruence, were found to be important only in terms of branded products, while word‐of‐mouth, servicescape, and employees, held importance with respect to branded services. The results provide a platform upon which future research can be built.

The purpose of this research paper is to uncover the relations between brand and human personality by identifying brand preferences of consumers with different personality types.

Based on the existing literature, 15 propositions are suggested linking Ekelund's DI types as parsimonious proxies of human personality and brand personality dimensions as suggested by Aaker. Propositions were tested through statistical analysis of survey data collected in two stages.

It was found that consumers prefer brands with personalities that match their own. For example, consumers with Blue DI type exhibit clear aversion from the excitement dimension of brand personality, whereas consumers with Red DI type exhibit clear preference for the sincerity dimension of brand personality. No clear findings emerged concerning the Green DI type, mostly likely linked to the individualistic, non‐conformist and innovative orientations of such individuals. In addition data revealed a possible hierarchy of brand personality dimensions' influence.

Findings provide guidelines for better tailoring of promotional materials based on target customer groups, as well as the ability to evaluate underperforming brands in terms of a brand‐human personality mismatch.

The paper fills a gap in the literature about the congruence between brand and human personalities, and demonstrates how brand personality dimensions impacts brand preference among different consumer types.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of brand experience on hospital brand equity; also to assess the effects of different brand equity dimensions on overall customer‐based hospital brand equity.

Measurement items for each variable are developed by integrating existing literature and qualitative in‐depth interviews with patients who have either used, or are using hospital services in India. Face‐to‐face interviews with patients were conducted to obtain 902 usable data points. Psychometric properties of the measurement instrument were satisfactory. Data were analyzed using structural equation modelling to test the influences of different dimensions of brand experience on brand equity dimensions and on overall hospital brand equity.

The study found that brand experience is an important factor influencing hospital brand equity. The study provides evidence that the brand experience dimensions (sensory, affective, behavioural and intellectual) positively influence the five brand equity dimensions (brand awareness, brand association, perceived quality, brand trust and brand loyalty). The study also confirms the influence of brand equity dimensions (brand awareness, brand association, perceived quality, brand trust and brand loyalty) on customer‐based hospital brand equity.

The distinctive contribution of this research is that it examines the effect of brand experience on customer‐based brand equity in the context of a credence‐based service in an emerging economy. Such a work is essential in understanding the importance of experiential marketing in an emerging economy for building a strong service brand.

This paper aims to clarify an important nuance by proposing that people attribute human mind to brands on two distinct dimensions: think and feel.

Eight studies were conducted to first develop and validate the 14-item Brand Anthropomorphism Questionnaire, and then to investigate how the two subscales, think or feel dimensions, influence consumer moral judgment of brands.

This research developed a 14-item Brand Anthropomorphism Questionnaire with two subscales, which are psychometrically sound and show discriminant validity with regard to existing brand constructs. Furthermore, think or feel brand anthropomorphism dimensions can predict consumers’ moral judgment of brands.

The present research offers preliminary evidence about the value of distinguishing between think brand and feel brand in consumer moral judgment. Further research could investigate other potential impact of the two dimensions, and possible antecedents of think/feel dimensions.

Managers can use the scale for assessment, planning, decision-making and tracking purposes. In addition, in the event of brand scandal or brand social responsibility activities, public-relations efforts can use the findings to earn or regain the trust of consumers, as this research demonstrates that marketers can shape (tailor) the feel or think dimensions of brand perception to change consumers’ moral judgment of the brands.

This research makes theoretical contribution to the brand anthropomorphism literature by differentiating the two dimensions and exploring the influence of anthropomorphism of consumer moral judgment.