Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
Student First Name:Reham
Student Surname:Ebrahim
Copyright subsists in all papers and content posted on this site.
Further copying or distribution by any means without prior permission is prohibited,
except for the purposes of non-commercial private study or research, as defined in the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or as otherwise authorised by statute.
To obtain permission, please contact the author of the relevant paper in the first
instance or email [email protected] with details of your request.
1
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
A Study of Brand Preference: An Experiential View
Abstract
Consumers brand preferences represent a fundamental step in understanding consumer
choices. A deeper understanding of such preference dynamics can help marketing mangers’
better design marketing program and build a long term relationship with consumers. Despite
the existence of some studies investigating how brand preference is built and changed, most
of them focus on examining factors from consumer behavior perspective or advertising
perspective. This paper aims to build a conceptual framework of brand preferences from a
new perspective, the consumer’s experiential view.
Introduction
There has been a long standing interest from marketers to understand how consumers form
their preferences toward a specific brand. Brand preference is closely related to brand choice
that can facilitate consumer decision making and activate brand purchase. Knowing the
pattern of consumer preferences across the population is a critical input for designing and
developing innovative marketing strategies. It also uncovers the heterogeneity of consumer
choices leading to efficient market segmentation strategies. However, forecasting consumer’s
preferences between brands is not an easy task. Most of the early models focused on brand
attributes in preference construction (e.g. Fishbein, 1965). Thus the evolving marketing
strategies focus on analysing and communicating information about product attributes.
Although these cognitive responses derived from beliefs about brand attributes are important
in building preferences, there are other emotional responses (e.g. elaboration likelihood
model-1982), social influences (e.g. extended Fishbein model) that can influence brand
preferences. It is demonstrated that consumers can have an already established preference and
refer to the brand attributes that confirm their preferences. In addition, this traditional
2
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
cognitive view that deemed consumer as rational decision making had been shifted to the
experiential view focuses on the emotional, cognitive, symbolic responses of consumption
(Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). This shift echoed the changes that companies have moved
from focusing on attributes and features toward creating experiences to their consumers.
Brands are no longer bundles of functional characteristic but are means of providing
experiences (Schmitt, 1999). Moreover, these experiences were hypothesised to be an
important driver in building brand preferences.
This study adopts the experiential view in studying the relationship between brand experience
and brand preference. It will identify how brand experiences can build consumer’s
preferences toward certain brands directly or indirectly by affecting the brand associations
and brand personality. This paper is organised in three sections as follows; firstly, discuss the
concept of brand preference, model of formation, and the previous studies. Secondly, the
conceptual framework, and finally, the research design.
2.1 The Concept of Brand Preference
The notion of preference has been considered in different disciplines such as economists,
psychologists, sociology. However there is no commonly agreed definition of preference
among these disciplines. For example, economists believe that preferences are exogenous,
stable, and known with adequate precision and are revealed through choice behaviour. The
economic view of preference had been criticised for assuming that preferences are stable and
endogenous. An individual’s preferences are not stable and can be endogenous or exogenous.
In marketing literature, the word preference means the desirability or choice of an alternative.
Preferences are above all behavioural tendencies (Zajonc and Markus, 1982). Brand
preference is defined variously as the consumer’s predispositions toward a brand that varies
3
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
depending on the salient beliefs that are activated at a given time; the consumer biasness
toward a certain brand; the extent to which a consumer favours one brand over another. For
this study a working definition for brand preference is offered: “the biased behavioural
tendencies reflecting the consumer’s predisposition toward a brand”. Moreover,there is
difference between brand preference and brand loyalty. Brand preference represents the
attitudinal brand loyalty excluding the action of repeat purchasing; the brand-oriented
attitudinal loyalty. The main theme is that the first three decision-making phases of brand
loyalty constitute the focal of brand preference. Thus, brand preference is related to brand
loyalty; however, brand loyalty is more consistent depicted by the long term repeated
purchasing behaviour.
2.2 Previous Studies on Brand Preference
Prior studies on brand preference can be divided into two groups: the first group is for
studies examined the impact of consumer-related factors. They focused on the impact of
cultural, social, psychological and personal factors of consumers. The main findings of this
group studies revealed that changes in consumers’ life style can cause changes in their brand
preferences. The consumers’ personality traits and values are also considered to be important
predicators of brand preference. The second group addressed the impact of brand-related
factors such as the brand price and other marketing communications tools with particular
concern on advertising and promotion. One of the major findings of these studies is that the
brand attributes, plus other brand factors such as perceived value have a significant impact on
brand preference. In addition, the interaction between the self-image and brand-image; the
self-image congruence has shown to be important in brand preference building.
4
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
2.3 Brand Preference Models
According to multi-attribute models brand preferences can be explained by consumer’s
beliefs about brand attributes. However, among multi-attribute models Fishbein model is the
most influential one and has been supported empirically. In the theory of buyer behaviour,
preferences are the predispositions toward the brands formed from past experiences upon
which the buyer ranks the brands in the evoked set. Although these models had contributed in
the explanation of brand preference formation, they were criticized as being cognitive models
that regard consumers as rational and logical problem solver, neglecting the role of affective
elements in influencing the consumer behaviour (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982).
Accordingly, Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) suggest the shift from this traditional view to
an experiential view. Table 1 summarises the main differences between both views. While the
traditional view focuses on cognitive factors in explain the consumer behaviour, the
experiential view focuses on the symbolic, hedonic responses beside the cognitive responses,
and regards consumers as more blood and flesh humans who can have emotional and
cognitive responses toward products. The experiential view contributes more in explanation
of brand preferences formation by emphasising the role of the responses other than the
cognitive one derived from consumers’ experiences with the brand.
3. A Conceptual framework and research propositions
Based on the preceding discussion, a conceptual model is developed that links brand
experience and brand preference. It considers the basic antecedents of brand preference and
the direct or indirect impact of brand experience on brand preference. The proposed model
has five constructs: brand experience, brand associations, brand personality, human
personality, and brand preference (as shown in Figure 1).
5
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
Table 1: The differences between the traditional and experiential view
Developed by the researcher, (Holbrook and Hirschman ,1982)
Figure 1: Conceptual framework (Developed by the researcher)
6
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
3.1. Brand Experience
Brand experience is the subjective internal consumer responses and behaviour evoked by
brand related stimuli that are a part of a brand’s design and identity, packaging,
communications and environments (Brakus et al, 2009, p.55). Preference formation is a
cumulative, learning process that evolves through time given that experience is the primary
source of learning. It is argued that all aspects of brand experience pave the way and play a
fundamental role in determining and building consumer’s brand preference. Preferences will
change by changing experience, the following can be proposed:
P1: Brand experience is directly related to brand preference.
3.2. Brand Associations
Brand associations are the information, such as brand attributes and benefits linked to the
node in memory (Keller, 1998). According to the human associative theory (HAM)
(Anderson, 1983), brand associations can be formed through direct and indirect experiences.
On the other hand, brand associations provide buyers with reasons to buy and create value for
the brand. They help consumers to process and retrieve information and evoke positive affect
and cognitive considerations of benefits. Brand experience is a key source of information that
consumers have about the brand, linked in memory forming the brand related associations,
which, in turn, will form brand preferences. Therefore, the following can be proposed:
P2: Brand experience is directly related to brand associations.
P3: Brand associations are directly related to brand preferences.
3.3. Brand Personality
Brand personality refers to a set of human characteristics associated with a brand (Aaker,
1997), it is about humanising the brand. Closely related to brand associations brand
7
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
personality refers to the symbolic meaning of brand associations (Keller, 1998). Consumer
perceptions of a brand personality are formed and influenced by all the direct and indirect
contacts the consumer has with the brand. A useful input to these inferences is likely to be
brand experience (Brakus et al, 2009). The brand personality is created and developed by the
direct or indirect brand contact that the consumer experiences. Moreover, consumer’s
experiences enhance the perception and evaluation of brand personality as authentic and true
to its own nature. The behavioural, intellectual, affective and sensory responses experienced
by the consumer facilitate the trait judgment about a brand personality dimensions. By
humanising the brand and signalling important attributes, brand personality allows brands to
be used as a self-expressive tool facilitating social interactions and building interpersonal
relationships. The marketing literature shows that brand associations are an important source
of brand personality, which, in turn, is a key driver of brand preference. Accordingly it can be
proposed that:
P4: Brand experience positively influences brand personality.
P5: Brand associations positively influence brand personality.
P6: Brand personality positively influences brand preference.
3.4. Human-Brand Personality Congruence
The self-concept is among the building blocks of brand personality (Heding et al, 2009).
When consuming a brand with personality, consumers evaluate brands by matching process
that is identifying brands congruent with their own self-image. This process is called selfcongruity; congruence between consumer’s self-concept or self-perception and symbolic
brand image. The brand personality-self-concept congruence enhances the affective,
attitudinal and behavioural responses, thus leading to favorable brand attitude strong brand
preference over competing brands. Consequently the following can be assumed:
8
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
P7: The impact of brand personality on brand preference is stronger when there is a
high congruence between the human and brand personality.
4. Methodological Approach
The adopted methodology should be related to the research questions, this study apply both
deductive and inductive approach. Table 2 show how the research questions are related to the
methodological approach.
Table 2: Research framework
Developed by the researcher
To test the conceptual model, empirical study will be conducted in two phrases. The first
phrase uses qualitative research to provide a deeper understanding of the research topic and
context and to refine the conceptual model. Moreover, the qualitative method will help in
determining the items of research constructs and identify the consumer vocabulary. In the
second stage, quantitative data will be collected to validate the qualitative findings. The
details of research design are shown in figure 2.
9
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
Figure 2: Research Design
Developed by the researcher
10
Brunel Business School – Doctoral Symposium 28th & 29th March 2011
References
Aaker, Jennifer L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research,
XXXIV, 347-356.
Anderson, J.C. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning
and Verbal Behaviour, 22 (3), 261-295.
Brakus, J. Josko., Schmitt, Bernd H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand experience: What is
it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty?. Journal of Marketing, 73 (3), 52-68.
Fishbein, M. (1965). A consideration of beliefs, attitudes, and their relationships. In Seteiner,
J. & Fishbein, M. Current studies in Social Psychology, (pp. 107-117). New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston.
Heding, Tilde., Knudtzen, Charlotte F., & Bjerre, Mogens. (2009). Brand Management,
Research, Theory and Practice. Routledge.
Holbrook, Morris B., & Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1982), The experiential aspects of
consumption: Consumer fantasies, feeling, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, (9)
(September), 132-140.
Hsee, Christopher K., Yang, Yang., Gu, Yangjie., & Chen, Jie. (2009). Specification seeking:
How product specifications influence consumer preference. Journal of Consumer
Research, 35, 952-966.
Keller, Kevin Lane. (1998). Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, And
Managing Brand Equity. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Schmitt, Bernd. (1999), Experiential Marketing: How to get customers to sense. Feel, think,
act, relate to your company and brands, The Free Press, Simon & Schuster Inc.
Zajonc, Robert B., & Markus, Hazel. (1982). Affective and cognitive factors in preferences.
Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 123.
11