Search results

This study was predicated on gaze behaviour in front-of-shelf orientation. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the effect of the presence (absence) of competing brands on consumer attention in front-of-shelf orientation. The effects on visual attention investigated on the shelf were eye scan path of the total available area, information acquisition in extremities and mental effort.

Two experiments were performed using eye-tracking technology. The first study was conducted in a closed and static environment. The second study was performed in an open and dynamic environment. In these studies, the authors used, as an independent variable, the arrangement of brands on shelves (presence vs absence of competing) and evaluated the variations in the visual attention through three dependent variables: eye scan path of the total available area, information acquisition in extremities and mental effort.

Three hypotheses were tested. The first hypothesis confirmed that scenarios of competitive brands are rather composed of natural complex scenes, so there is a greater number of eye fixations needed to identify and locate objects. In addition, the second hypothesis demonstrated that, in scenarios of competitive brands, there is an acceleration of information acquisitions causing an increase in peripheral vision at the ends of the shelf. Finally, the third hypothesis demonstrated that the presence of a greater attention effort in the scenario of competing brands was verified, since the mental effort variables (revisiting the shelf, noting and re-examining) were greater than in the scenario of non-competing brands.

Limitations of this study may be associated with the absence of top-down factors and a lack of results associated with evaluation and verification phases.

Gaze behaviour is susceptible to the information derived from the absence and presence of competing brands.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of the moral failure of a scandalized foreign brand afflicted with a product-harm crisis on competing brands (i.e. within the same product category) while taking into account the country of origin (COO) of the brands.

This paper presents the results of two studies. The first study uses an experimental design, while the second uses a survey to examine a real-life product-harm crisis.

The results indicate that the moral failure of a scandalized foreign brand has an indirect negative effect on the intention to purchase competing foreign brands from the COO of the scandalized foreign brand. This effect is, however, reversed for domestic brands, where moral failure has an indirect positive effect on the intention to purchase competing domestic brands.

The results of this research were based on an examination of how US consumers responded to the moral failure of Japanese and German brands. Future studies should examine brands from different COOs in different countries.

These results suggest that competing foreign brands from the COO of the scandalized brand should collaborate to quickly handle a product-harm crisis to prevent a spillover and that domestic competitors should capitalize on the opportunity to attract new customers.

This study represents a first attempt to examine the effect of a foreign brand’s moral failure in handling product-harm crisis on competing brands, both foreign and domestic.

The creativity-based facilitation effect, well documented by previous research, shows that creative advertisements (ads) are more memorable than regular (or less creative) ads, that is, creativity facilitates memory. This current research aims to extend our understanding by investigating the impact of creativity on regular ads and competitive advertising. It examines whether creative ads impair the memorability of regular ads to determine whether a “creativity-based impairment effect” exists.

Three experiments were conducted. Experiment 1 tested creativity-based impairment effects in brand recall. Experiment 2 replicated and validated the impairment effect in recall, using a different presentation order of ads. In Experiment 3, effects of creative ads on competing vs non-competing brands were examined.

Results found that creative ads impaired the brand recall of regular ads, creative ads impaired the recall of competing brands more than non-competing brands and creative ads were recalled earlier in top-of-mind recall positions.

Future research may look at whether different memory measures (e.g. recognition), different proportions of creative ads, and ads of familiar vs unfamiliar brands produce differential impairment effects.

One suggestion from this research could be to not only copy-test your own brand’s advertising, but also test the advertising of other brands so that the target ad’s relative levels of creativity can be assessed before media buying. As a result of this testing, when the brand identifies any potential impairment effects, the identified creative ads could then be tracked in terms of media placement, providing a guide of where “not to schedule” advertising.

This research makes an important theoretical contribution as the first to explore impairment effects in the context of creative advertising. In doing so, it offers important managerial insights for regular and competitive advertising.

Previous literature has discussed the importance of two types of social media exposures: owned social media (OSM) exposures generated by service providers and earned social media (ESM) exposures initiated by consumers. This study aims to examine the relative effects of owned and ESM exposures on brand purchase, as well as their advertising externality to competing brands. Rooted in theory of planned behavior and advertising externality literature, this study hypothesizes that owned and ESM exposures positively influence brand purchase. Such effects, however, can spill over to competing brands that invest in social media marketing and co-exist in the market.

This study collects brand purchase records and social media messages on the Facebook brand pages of a group of service providers over 12 months. The data are assembled for time series analysis with the unit of analysis being “brand × bi-week”.

Using a blend of fixed-effects models and seemingly unrelated regressions, this study finds that both owned and ESM exposures positively affect brand purchase, the purchase effect of OSM exposures is greater than ESM exposures, OSM exposures generate not only more purchase of the focal brand but also positive advertising externality to competing brands, whereas ESM exposures locks up the advertising effect to the focal brand without spilling over to competing brands.

This study advances the understanding about the externality of social media exposures in an increasingly competitive market where multiple brands invest in social media marketing and co-exist. Important implications on the strategic use of social media exposures to drive brand purchase while competing with similar brands are provided.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the role of identity-based relationships, customer brand identification and peer identification, in driving customer outcomes including customer experiential hedonic value, social influence and repurchase intentions through the effects on value co-creation among customers and competitor brand hate, while taking into consideration the moderating impact of individualism.

The study integrates social identity theory, identity-based marketing perspective and self-construal theory to develop relationships. The data comprises a web-based survey of customers in the USA and was analyzed using structural equation modeling.

Customer brand identification and peer identification are drivers of value co-creation among customers, which leads to favorable outcomes at the customer and brand levels. Customer brand identification drives customers to hate competing brands, which, in turn, motivates customers to exert social influence in favor of their brand and to hold additional repurchase intentions. Customer brand identification and peer identification play different roles in motivating customers to co-create value with their fellows and drive customers to feel hatred toward competing brands contingent on customer individualism.

Customer brand identification and peer identification play different roles in engaging customers in value co-creation with their peers and competing brands have with their rivals. Individualism self-construal holds a dual role when interacting with customer identification. The study fills multiple gaps in the literature by examining additional effects of customer brand identification and peer identification and exploring a relatively new dimension of the value co-creation process, as well as the role of customers in the competition between brands.

Brands need to view customers who identify with them as socially active customers capable of participating in value co-creation with other customers and engaging in the rivalry faced by the brands. Moreover, brands are required to build and nurture relationships that are based on social identification to encourage customer brand identification and peer identification which results in favorable customer and business outcomes.

This study examines the effects of two forms of customer identification on value co-creation between customers and competitor brand hate. In addition, it identifies the dual moderating role of customer individualism on the effects of both social identification forms. The study fills multiple gaps in the literature by understanding new aspects of customer identification, value co-creation and brand hate.

This paper aims to investigate the effects of buzz about the focal brand on competing brands’ attitudes.

Brand-related buzz can be defined as “a general sense of [positive or negative] excitement about or interest in [a brand], as reflected in or generated by word of mouth” (Oxford dictionary). The authors investigate the spillover effects of such positive and negative buzz on brand attitudes of 648 brands in 43 categories over five years.

The authors find that spillover effects are widespread across product categories and affect competing brands through (negative) halo effect and (unfavorable) preference substitution. The authors do not find evidence of positive spillover effects for non-focal brands.

The authors provide generalizable evidence that positive and negative buzz spills over competing brands’ attitudes for hundreds of brands across the largest sectors of the US economy. Interestingly, positive and negative buzz have asymmetric effects on consumer attitudes. These effects vary by consumer attitude metric and are moderated by brand news intensity, strength and similarity.

First, marketing managers should monitor the buzz of competing brands. Second, if managers are concerned with impressions, they should intervene when there is a negative buzz about competitors (halo effect). Third, managers should stimulate positive buzz to negatively affect their competitors’ purchases. Fourth, managing a smaller brand has advantages regarding impressions and recommendations, while news intensity can shield from negative spillover effects for impressions. Finally, brand similarity amplifies the spillover effects across the board.

This paper provides evidence that spillover effects are pervasive and urges marketing managers and academics to incorporate competing buzz in their frameworks and strategies.

The purpose of this research is to show how the dual mediation model has been used to explain consumer responses toward an ad and a brand. This study attempts to incorporate ad affect and competition into the framework and examine the effects of advertising on consumers' attitudes and purchase intentions in multiple‐ad and multiple‐brand environments.

A total of 165 usable data (54 percent female, mean age=36.2) were collected from an experiment conducted in North America.

The findings revealed that the higher level of affective responses to a focal ad significantly leads to a higher evaluation of that ad. Our findings also indicated that information about a competing ad and brand is processed comparatively and that evaluations of the competing ad and brand negatively influence evaluations of a focal ad and brand.

Important theoretical contributions of this study are that ad affect is an important determinant in the formation of ad attitude and it can be incorporated into the dual mediation model to explain the effects of advertising on consumer behavior. Our research also challenges the dual mediation model by incorporating competition into the model. Managerial implications of these results were discussed.

This paper aims to investigate how consumers adjust their price expectations for brands in response to previously encountered prices. The effects of two distinct components of price history, focal and contextual, are examined. The focal component represents the role of a brand's own previous price(s) in determining future price expectations. In contrast, the contextual component represents the impact of the prices of previously considered competing brands.

A total of 60 subjects were enrolled to participate in a longitudinal, quantitative, survey‐based study that required them to provide information on brand perceptions, price expectations, brand consideration and choice.

Empirical comparison of several model formulations confirms that both components are crucial in explaining how consumers adjust their price expectations in response to the prices of considered brands. Consistent with a wide body of research, a brand's own previous price exerts the greatest influence on price expectations. However, the extent to which contextual prices are assimilated depends on the composition of consumers' consideration sets. Avenues for future research and implications for brand pricing and positioning are discussed.

The results offer several unique perspectives that stand out from (and build further on) previous research. First, although previous research has examined the effects of competing brands' current prices on brand choices, it has not incorporated the prices of competing brands that may have been observed on previous shopping occasions. Second, measures and assesses the perceived variability within the consumers' consideration sets influences the impact of the contextual component on a brand's current reference price.

This study aims to question the conventional wisdom that brands compete for customers, especially in mature industries such as soft drinks. Rather than engaging in price wars or promotion wars, brands coexist in the markets by focusing on their own brand loyal customers.

Consumer panel data of carbonated beverages are examined using Markov chains to measure switching between two brands: Coke and Pepsi. Switching rates are conducted for all Coke households (n = 10,474) and Pepsi households (n = 7,227). This is further examined with respect to heavy half (upper median) consumers of each brand who make up approximately 86 per cent of volume purchases.

Households that made a majority of their purchase volume in either Coke or Pepsi products stayed with their preferred brands in subsequent quarters: 85 to 97 per cent of households. These findings are validated at all levels of the brand architecture (family brands, product brands and modified brands), even though both brands engage in similar marketing mix tactics (advertising, price cuts, distribution, product offerings). Loyalty was even higher among the heavy user households.

The research was conducted using two well-known brands in a mature industry. Services or non-mature markets may exhibit different loyalty patterns.

The study extends prior research on competition, loyalty and branded offerings to show that brand loyalty remains high despite marketing efforts to switch the brand buying behavior.

Many studies have examined the short‐term and long‐term effects of price promotions. This study adds to previous research by examining, in some depth, the effects of a massively successful price promotion in a consumer goods category. This study sought to determine if this large price promotion had any: longer‐term effect on brand volume; short‐term effect on total category volume for the retailer; short‐term effect on competing retailers; and longer‐term effect on category sales for the retailer that ran the promotion. The results showed that this promotion did not have any longer‐term (positive or negative) effect on the brand, but it did expand the total category for the retailer, albeit temporarily. Sales dropped slightly for one competing retailer at the time of the promotion, but not for the other two retailers in the market. Finally, the study found that the promotion was followed by a decline in total category volume for the retailer, suggesting some degree of purchase acceleration or stockpiling by consumers. The results suggest that the longer‐term negative effect on category volume cancelled out approximately two thirds of the gains of the price promotion to the retailer.