Search results

Some marketers have challenged psychologists’ contention that human beings can only learn by using conscious effort. They argue that advertising can be effective at low levels of (or even no) attention. Also, despite the absence of (or low levels of) consciousness, these subconscious responses can be linked to brands. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of implicit learning in the context of logo substitution – an image that may not look like the original logo, and may not even be consciously associated with the original brand or its logo.

Data were collected by means of two quasi-experimental studies.

The results suggest that, thanks to implicit learning, logo substitution can be effective.

One limitation was that data were collected from two relatively small convenience samples.

Logo substitution can be of value when a company faces a situation when advertising is banned or restricted, when the target market is saturated with marketing stimuli (clutter) and when there is a risk that aggressive advertising can lead to psychological reactance. The purpose of logo substitution would then be to unobtrusively activate mental representations closely related to the original logo.

The central contribution of this study is that it demonstrates how the principles of implicit social cognition, implicit learning and logo substitution can be used by marketers to overcome the undesirable and even adverse advertising circumstances they sometimes face.

The purpose of this study is to investigate consumers’ subconscious/emotional responses to brand tarnishment.

Brand tarnishment and the responses of business firms in protecting their brands against economic harm have been controversial topics for many years. Unfortunately, those who have resorted to the courts to protect their brands have met with mixed success, mainly because the methodologies used to demonstrate economic harm have proved controversial. One caveat in the history of court cases is the absence of any investigation related to emotional responses to brand dilution in general, and to brand tarnishment in particular. This is so, despite several calls to investigate this relationship.

It is concluded that the brand tarnishment of fairly well-known brands is largely ineffectual (neutral emotional responses).

The primary contribution of this study is that, for the first time, some light is shed on consumers’ emotional responses to brand tarnishment. Irrespective of the neurophysiological measure used, the results consistently demonstrate that the subconscious responses to brand tarnishment are generally neutral. The results thus do not suggest any likelihood of severe economic harm due to negative emotional responses to brand tarnishment.

The results of this study have important managerial implications for brand managers, and particularly for those responsible for relatively well-established brands. It is clear that at the unconscious level, brand tarnishment is not as harmful as many seem to believe. There is evidence that brands will not be harmed if the “tarnishment” consists of social commentary.

It could also suggest that consumers can differentiate between different forms of tarnishment, and that tarnishment involving social commentary is not frowned upon. This may be because the consumer agrees with the social commentary, or finds it amusing. In short, it seems that consumers may see the tarnishment as mildly amusing, but realize that it is not of a serious nature.

The results seem to suggest that legal action against those who tarnish brands is unnecessary and probably ineffective. Instead, this study proposes more innovative ways to respond to brand tarnishment.