Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Article information:
To cite this document:
Fang Liu Jianyao Li Dick Mizerski Huangting Soh, (2012),"Self-congruity, brand attitude, and brand loyalty:
a study on luxury brands", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 Iss 7/8 pp. 922 - 937
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090561211230098
Downloaded on: 21 March 2016, At: 10:05 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 56 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 19307 times since 2012*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:551360 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm
EJM
46,7/8
922
Fang Liu
Jianyao Li
Dick Mizerski
Business School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia, and
Huangting Soh
Jushua Research Consultants, Singapore
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to examine the effects of three self-congruity constructs: the brands
personality congruity (BPC), the brands user imagery congruity and the brands usage imagery
congruity, in consumers attitude and brand loyalty toward two luxury fashion brands.
Design/methodology/approach Using a sample of Australian consumers, this study examines
two luxury fashion brands (CK and Chanel) from two product categories, watches and sunglasses.
Structural equation modeling is used to test the hypotheses.
Findings This study finds that user and usage imagery congruity are stronger predictors for brand
attitude and brand loyalty than BPC in the context of the luxury fashion brands tested. Both user and
usage imagery congruity have significant effects in brand attitude and brand loyalty in most analyses.
This study finds no significant effect of BPC in either brand attitude or brand loyalty for the two
brands tested.
Research limitations/implications Future studies should include more populations, product
categories and more brands in each category.
Practical implications Symbolic benefits are key motivations behind luxury brand purchases.
Symbolic benefits are from non-product-related attributes like imagery. One important implication of
the study is that user and usage imagery are more important to build than attempts to develop a
brands personality. Because most luxury brands market in multiple product categories, attention
should be paid to the core perceptions of user and usage imagery for the brand when designing
communication strategies for different categories.
Originality/value This study provides the first evidence that these self-congruity concepts may
represent different imageries that lead to different effects in brand attitude and brand loyalty. Findings
from this study add to the understanding of the consumption of luxury brands.
Keywords Brand image, Brand loyalty, Luxury brands, Premier brands, Self-congruity, Brand attitude,
Brand personality
Paper type Research paper
European Journal of Marketing
Vol. 46 No. 7/8, 2012
pp. 922-937
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0309-0566
DOI 10.1108/03090561211230098
The authors would like to thank Professor Temi Abimbola, Dr Myfanwy Trueman, Dr Oriol
Iglesias and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.
Introduction
There has been increasing interest in adopting self-congruity theory in brand studies
(e.g. Sirgy, 1986; Kressmann et al., 2006). Self-congruity refers to the likeliness of
comparing oneself with other objects and stimuli. It has been widely adopted in
brand-related research to help both researchers and practitioners understand brand
purchasing behaviour (see literature review by Sirgy, 1986; Sirgy et al., 1997;
Christodoulides and Veloutsou, 2009).
There are three important brand self-congruity concepts:
(1) Brand Personality Congruity;
(2) Brand User Imagery Congruity; and
(3) Brand Usage Imagery Congruity.
Aaker (1997, p. 347) defines brand personality as, the set of human characteristics
associated with a brand. Brand Personality has five major dimensions:
(1) sincerity;
(2) excitement;
(3) competence;
(4) sophistication; and
(5) ruggedness (Aaker, 1997).
Brand Personality Congruity refers to the relationship between the consumers
perception of a brands personality and their perception of their own personality (Wee,
2004). For example, the brand personality of an automobile brand may be perceived as
outgoing or aggressive. A potential consumer would be expected to judge if their
personality was outgoing and aggressive to match the perceived personality of the
automobile brand. Many studies have reported that Brand Personality Congruity has a
significant effect in brand evaluations (e.g. Freling and Forbes, 2005; Sweeney and Bao,
2009). However, most of these studies have looked at Brand Personality Congruity as
the only independent variable so the importance of brand personality may have been
exaggerated due to its association with other more salient variables.
Brand User Imagery Congruity is defined as the degree of perceived similarity a
potential buyer sees of the typical user of a brand with himself or herself (Sirgy et al.,
1997). Unlike brand personality, the user imagery perceptions are typically based on
visual aspects of the user such as age, gender, culture or trappings of status like
jewellery or clothing. Keller (1998) states that user imagery attributes are mainly
created directly from the consumers own experience with the brand users and are
likely to be related to highly visible products such as automobiles and fashion goods.
Numerous empirical studies (e.g. Sirgy, 1986; Putoni, 2000; Kressmann et al., 2006)
have demonstrated that Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant effect in
brand evaluations.
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity refers to the association between consumers
perceptions of the typical use of a brand and how the brand is perceived appropriate
regarding the situation of use (Sotiropoulos, 2003). For example, an expensive Channel
bag may be seen appropriate for a formal function but not for an everyday use. Despite
its importance, empirical studies on usage imagery are rarely reported.
A study on
luxury brands
923
EJM
46,7/8
924
This study focuses on these three types of self-congruity and their relationship to
potential attitude and loyalty toward a luxury brand. The study contributes to the
existing literature in a number of ways. First, no study has examined the impact of all
three types of congruity on attitude and loyalty toward a brand. Most of the previous
research (e.g. Kressmann et al., 2006) focuses on only one type of congruity, such as brand
personality. One exception is Helgeson and Suppellens study (2004) that found that
Brand Personality Congruity and Brand User Imagery Congruity have important and
equal effects in Swedish consumers attitudes toward retail store brands. Liu et al. (2008),
however, reported that Brand User Imagery Congruity had a larger effect in attitudes
toward automobile brands than Brand Personality Congruity. Because the construct of
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity may also be salient in the decision process, an
examination of all three types of brand self-congruity is important for developing a better
understanding of the effects of a consumers self-congruity in brand-related decisions.
Second, attitude and loyalty toward a brand are two of the most popular cognitive
predictors of consumers behaviour toward a brand (Mitchell and Olson, 1981; Erdem
et al., 2006). A number of studies (e.g. Sirgy et al., 2008) have examined the effect of
self-congruity in consumers loyalty toward a brand. Only one study (Liu et al., 2008)
has examined the effect of self-congruity in attitude toward a brand. This study will
examine both attitude and loyalty toward brands for a better understanding of the
effect of buyer or consumer self-congruity in two often used predictors of purchase.
Finally, this study looks into the effect of potential buyers self-congruity in their
purchasing of luxury brands. Luxury brands are the most common and obvious
applications to test with regard to image because these brands go beyond functionality
and emphasize the status and image of an individual (Veblen, 1899; Nueno and Quelch,
1998). Despite the growing importance of luxury branding, empirical research on
luxury brands is very limited (e.g. Putoni, 2000; Wiedmann et al., 2007).
Literature review
Brand images, attitude and loyalty toward a brand
A brands image is a key component of brand equity, or brand value (Aaker, 1991).
Keller (1993) defines brand image as different types of brand associations as well as the
favourability, strength and uniqueness of these associations. Brand associations are
developed based on product-related and non product-related attributes. Brand
personality, user imagery, and usage imagery are the three main non product-related
attributes in Kellers, 1998 model of brand equity. Biel (1992) claims that user imagery
is a key form of brand image while Shimp (2010) states that usage imagery has an
important contribution to a brands image.
Attitude toward a brand, or Brand Attitude, is another key component for valuing a
brands equity. Mitchell and Olson (1981) define Brand Attitude as an individuals
overall evaluation of a brand. This means that attitude toward a brand mainly depends
on a consumers own perceptions regarding a brand, and are argued to be a reliable
predictor of consumers behaviour toward brands (Shimp, 2010). Most researchers
(e.g. Aaker, 1996; Faircloth et al., 2001; Helgeson and Supphellen, 2004) regard these
two as distinctive concepts where brand image helps develop potential buyers overall
evaluation or attitude toward a brand.
The Brand Loyalty construct signifies the degree of attachment a customer has for a
brand and it is closely linked to use experience. Dick and Basu (1994) and Neal and
Strauss (2008) both propose that Brand Loyalty have attitudinal and behavioural
dimensions. The attitudinal dimension describes a consumers overall satisfaction
while the behavioural dimension represents the tendency of a consumer to purchase a
particular brand repeatedly over time.
Some previous studies (e.g. Starr and Rubinson, 1978) find a positive relationship
between attitude and loyalty toward a brand. A similar relationship appears to exist
between a brands image and loyalty toward the brand (e.g., Mustafa, 1999).
Researchers such as Keller (1993) view loyalty toward a brand as an outcome of
effectively managing knowledge about a brands images and attitude toward the
brand. Therefore, both a brands image and the buyers attitude toward a brand
contribute to loyalty toward the brand (Faircloth et al., 2001).
Brand Personality Congruity
It has been long suspected that consumers use products and brands to form and
sustain their image (Veblen, 1899). The brands image can provide self-expressive
benefits where consumers can use visually consumed brands to express their own
image (Aaker, 1996). A brands ability to express ones self-image can be explained by
self-congruity theory (Sirgy et al., 1997). A theory derived from psychology,
self-congruity theory proposes that consumers like to compare themselves with a
brand and see if the brand matches their concept of themselves (Sirgy, 1986).
Past research (e.g. Sirgy, 1986) has suggested that consumers have a better liking
(attitude towards) for brands that are perceived to have strong favourable human
characteristics that are congruent with his or her self-concept. Various studies report
that Brand Personality Congruity has a positive effect in attitude toward the brand
(e.g. De Chernatony and Riley, 1998; Harris and Fleming, 2005). Kim et al. (2001) also
finds that Brand Personality Congruity has a positive effect in loyalty toward the
brand. We propose that:
H1. Brand Personality Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Attitude.
H2. Brand Personality Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Loyalty.
Brand User Imagery Congruity
Brand User Imagery Congruity refers to the relationship between a buyers self image
and the perceived image of the user (Sirgy et al., 1997). High self-congruity would mean
that a consumer perceives the user of a particular brand closely matches his or her
image. Consumers are more likely to purchase a particular brand if they perceive it to
be consistent with their self images (Liu et al., 2008).
Sirgy et al. (1997) have shown evidence of using this construct to predict consumers
attitude and purchase intentions toward brands. Lim and Ocass (2001) find consumers
have more favourable preferences and purchase intentions toward a brand that has a
user image that is congruent with the perceived image of the brands target market. Liu
et al. (2008) find that Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive
effect in consumers attitude toward an automotive brand whilst Brand Personality
Congruity does not. Both Aaker (1996) and Keller (1998) assert that they need not be
congruent. For example, Levis brand personality (tough, durable and simple) is based
A study on
luxury brands
925
EJM
46,7/8
926
on the firms heritage of providing clothes for miners in the 1849 gold rush in
California, while its user imagery now tends to be urban, hip and unisex (Aaker, 1996).
User imagery is said to be developed based on consumers perception of the typical
user of a brand whereas brand personality is developed based on interpreting the
brand as having a human personality (Parker, 2005). Helgeson and Supphellen (2004)s
study has empirically supported that Brand Personality Congruity and Brand User
Imagery Congruity may be two distinctive constructs. We hypothesize that:
H3. Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Attitude.
H4. Brand User Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Loyalty.
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity
Biel (1992) defines brand usage imagery as the perceived stereotype of the situations in
which a brand or product is generally used. For example, formal wear can be easily
associated with a particular function, which is important and serious. Like user
imagery, usage imagery is typically formed either through direct contact with the
brand or through indirect means like word-of-mouth communications (Keller, 1998).
Brand Usage Imagery Congruity refers to the relationship between a consumers
expectations of the typical situations that a brand would be used by him/her, and the
general perceptions of the brands usage situations. Even though there has been
substantial discussions on this area (e.g. Biel, 1992; Sotiropoulos, 2003), limited
research has been conducted. The studies done to date (e.g. Liu et al., 2008) tend to
focus on the two other congruity concepts of personality and user imagery.
Research has found that consumers tend to rely on external cues if they do not have
sufficient self-schemas that are congruent with the brands image (Aaker, 1999).
However, consumers more easily visualize brand usage imagery of when and how the
brand should be used. Therefore, an association needs to exist between usage imagery
and the potential buyers self-congruity. Sotiropoulos (2003) finds that liking the brand is
expected to be higher when a respondent is presented with some usage imagery rather
than with none under conditions of high self-congruity. Therefore, we propose that:
H5. Brand Usage Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Attitude.
H6. Brand Usage Imagery Congruity has a significant and positive effect in Brand
Loyalty.
We also hypothesize a direct relationship between Brand Attitude and Brand Loyalty.
Figure 1 illustrates the relationships examined in this study.
H7. Brand Attitude has a significant and positive effect in Brand Loyalty.
Luxury brands
There have been a number of studies on luxury brands, the relationship with premium
pricing, and the consumption behaviour of prestige-seeking people (e.g. Vigneron and
Johnson, 1999; Yeoman and McMahon-Beattie, 2006). The 2008 global financial crisis
has slowed luxury brand consumption in most developed economies. However, some
A study on
luxury brands
927
Figure 1.
The conceptual model
emerging economies such as China and Russia are still experiencing continuous
growth in luxury consumption. For example, China still maintained a three percent
growth in luxury consumption after the global financial crisis, and it has now become
the third biggest luxury market (Chinadaily, 2008).
A luxury brand is defined as going beyond functionality and emphasizes the status
and image of an individual (Nueno and Quelch, 1998). As compared to necessity
products, luxury products (usually goods) often place more emphasis on image rather
than objective physical attributes. Important reasons for owning luxury products are to:
.
show success and social status;
.
reward own self; and
.
provide me with confidence (KPMG, 2006).
These reasons show that luxury brands provide individuals with relatively more
image and non-functional benefits than necessity products. Numerous studies (Aiello
et al., 2009; Heine, 2010) offer similar findings.
However, what one person perceives as luxury may be ordinary to another. To
minimize confusion, Vigneron and Johnson (1999) suggest a brand should consist of
five unique values in order to be considered as luxury; conspicuous value, unique
value, social value, hedonic value and quality value. Most luxury fashion brands
provide all these five values that help develop a brands overall image (Berry, 1994).
Therefore, this study focuses on luxury fashion brands to better understand the
relationships between imagery, self-congruity, attitude and loyalty toward a brand.
Research design
Sample, product and brand selection
This study uses a sample of university students in Australia. There are several reasons
for the choice beyond convenience. University students represent an important present
and future market segment that are most likely to buy luxury goods and services
(Hauck and Stanforth, 2007, p. 179). The chosen university for this study is one of the
EJM
46,7/8
928
most exclusive and expensive universities in one of Australias most expensive cities in
2009-2011. Due to the difficulty of getting admitted for enrolment and the associated
education costs, the students in this sample tend to come from families with above
average economic and social status. A major purpose of this study is to understand the
young affluents attitudes toward luxury brands because their early perceptions tend
to have effects in their long run behaviours (Unity Marketing, 2007). Finally, university
students are relatively homogenous in terms of their age, intelligence and income so
this similarity can reduce the potential effects of these potential covariates in the
results.
After conducting interviews of experts, this study chose luxury brand watches and
sunglasses as two product categories examined. OCass and Frost (2002) used these
two categories in a study to examine the effects of brand associations in the status and
conspicuous consumption of luxury brands. A pre-test among 50 undergraduate
students found that Calvin Klein (CK) and Channel were perceived as well recognised
luxury brands for watches and for sunglasses.
Questionnaire and scale development
The study adopts Aakers (1997) brand personality (BP) scale. The scale has five
dimensions and a total of 42 traits. Numerous studies have suggested precautions in
adopting the BP scale for different cultural contexts (e.g. Aaker et al., 2001; Sung and
Tinkham, 2005). The Australian culture, however, is viewed to be not distinctively
different from the US and UK cultures based on the key cultural dimensions
(e.g. Hofstede, 2001; Liu et al., 2009). Thus, Aakers BP scale was adopted for this study.
As some traits are product categories specific, ten of the 42 traits are removed based on
expert opinions. The second pre-test was conducted to test the BP scale, and further
four traits were removed from the measure due to their low factor loadings of less than
0.3 using factor analysis. The questions about self-personality use the same response
scale as brand personality. The absolute differences between brand personality and
self-personality represent the respondents Brand Personality Congruity.
The measurement for Brand User Imagery Congruity is adopted from Sirgy et al.
(1997), and includes four statements that are each rated on a five point Likert scale. The
five item measurement of Brand Usage Imagery Congruity was developed based on a
method similar to the one Sirgy et al. (1997) use to develop the scale for Brand User
Imagery Congruity. The measurement for Brand Attitude is adopted from MacKenzie
and Lutz (1989) and includes three semantic differential responses. The six-item
measurement for Brand Loyalty is adopted from Netemeyer et al. (2004) and Zeithaml
et al. (1996). A third pre-test was conducted to ensure the clarity of each item to
respondents and found no problems with the respondents interpretation or ability to
respond to the questions.
Data collection and analyses
Data collection
This study uses self-administered surveys completed during a lecture. A total of 391
students participated in the study. After removing the questionnaires that have less
than 50 per cent of the questions answered, 264 valid questionnaires remain for further
analyses. International students responses were not used for this study because the
Aaker scale used has been shown to be culturally specific. Also, many of the
international students that come to the university sampled come from Asian countries
where counterfeit luxury goods were the norm (OCass and Frost, 2002).
A mixture of 51 per cent males and 48 per cent females offer a good balance of
gender in the sample. Around 58 per cent of the respondents are between 16 and 20
years old with the rest between 20 and 30 years old. Twenty three percent (23 per cent)
of the respondents report spending an average of 100 Australian dollars per month on
non-necessities. Thirty seven percent (37 per cent) report spending between 100 to 200
dollars, while 23 per cent report between 200 to 300 dollars spent on non-necessities.
The remaining 17 per cent report an average monthly expenditure of more than 300
dollars on non-essentials.
A study on
luxury brands
929
Construct testing
Confirmatory factor analyses using the alpha factoring extraction method with
varimax rotation are conducted to test the constructs. Three out of the four items
provide a single significant factor for each brand for Brand User Imagery Congruity.
Another factor analysis finds a single factor for Brand Usage Imagery Congruity,
Brand Attitude and Brand Loyalty. For both CK and Channel luxury brands, a single
factor is an effect for four of the five Aaker Brand Personality Congruity dimensions
(see Table I). The standardized reliability coefficients for all of the measures are larger
than 0.8, indicating a good level of inter-item reliability.
Hypotheses testing
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using the maximum-likelihood estimation
method is used to test the hypotheses (see Figure 2 for the full model). Composite scores
are used to represent each construct. A separate SEM model is tested for CK and
Chanel brands. The model fit indices show that each model provides a good fit to the
data (CK: X 2/df 1.575, p 0.078, RMR 0.060, RMSEA 0.055, CFI 0.973,
Measure
Brand
Items
Eigenvalue
Reliability
BUserIC
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
CK
Chanel
3
3
5
5
3
3
5
5
6
6
4
3
4
4
4
4
2.277
2.666
3.258
3.702
2.205
2.275
3.015
3.431
2.658
2.504
2.082
2.457
1.802
1.648
2.675
1.627
57
67
65
74
74
76
50
58
44
42
35
31
45
42
45
30
0.807
0.902
0.861
0.915
0.845
0.858
0.821
0.885
0.816
0.824
0.837
0.856
0.901
0.897
0.871
0.889
BUsageIC
BA
BL
BPC_Sincerity
BPC_Excitement
BPC_Sophistication
BPC_Competence
Table I.
Confirmatory factor
analyses
EJM
46,7/8
930
Figure 2.
The full SEM model
GFI 0.961, TLI 0.930; Chanel: X 2/df 1.512, p 0.098, RMR 0.063,
RMSEA 0.052, CFI 0.987, GFI 0.970, TLI 0.967).
Tables II and III present the effects of all independent variables in Brand Attitude
and Brand Loyalty for the CK and Chanel brands. Brand Personality Congruity is not a
significant effect in the Brand Attitude for either brand. Therefore, hypothesis one is
Table II.
CK summary for each
hypothesized path and
covariance
Estimate
S.E.
C.R.
sincerity , -BPC
competency , -BPC
Sophisticated , -BPC
excitement , -BPC
BA , -BUserIC
BA , -BPC
BA , -BUsageIC
BL , -BUserIC
BL , -BPC
BL , -BUsageIC
BL , -BA
BUsageIC , . BPC
BPC , . BUserIC
BUsageIC , . BUserIC
0.650
0.527
0.134
0.722
0.459
0.088
0.128
0.105
0.099
0.290
0.311
0.262
0.338
0.285
0.056
0.058
0.043
0.063
0.079
0.057
0.067
0.079
0.051
0.060
0.072
0.056
0.053
0.043
11.560
9.135
3.094
11.388
5.831
1.559
1.900
1.335
1.961
4.830
4.330
4.643
6.354
6.617
, 0.001
, 0.001
0.002
, 0.001
, 0.001
0.119
0.048
0.182
0.050
, 0.001
, 0.001
, 0.001
, 0.001
, 0.001
Estimate
S.E.
C.R.
sincerity , -BPC
competency , -BPC
Sophisticated , -BPC
excitement , -BPC
BA , -BUserIC
BA , -BPC
BA , -BUsageIC
BL , -BUserIC
BL , -BPC
BL , -BUsageIC
BL , -BA
BUsageIC , . BPC
BPC , . BUserIC
BUsageIC , . BUserIC
0.685
0.743
0.066
0.638
0.511
0.110
0.223
0.484
0.055
0.029
0.451
0.388
0.380
0.685
0.052
0.067
0.046
0.072
0.092
0.060
0.095
0.080
0.046
0.075
0.060
0.063
0.066
0.071
13.084
11.164
1.450
8.891
5.554
1.885
2.357
6.086
1.182
0.391
7.457
6.122
5.792
9.601
, 0.001
, 0.001
0.147
, 0.001
, 0.001
0.060
0.018
, 0.001
0.237
0.695
, 0.001
, 0.001
, 0.001
, 0.001
not supported. The results show that Brand Personality Congruity is a significant
effect in Brand Loyalty for CK but not a significant effect in Chanel Brand Loyalty.
Thus, hypothesis two is only partially supported. Brand User Imagery Congruity is a
positive effect in Brand Attitude for both CK and Chanel brands. Hypothesis three is
supported. Brand User Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in Brand Loyalty for
the Chanel brand, but is not a significant effect in Brand Loyalty for the CK brand.
Thus, hypothesis four is only partially supported.
The construct Brand Usage Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in Brand
Attitude for both CK and Chanel brands. Thus, hypothesis five is supported. Brand
Usage Imagery Congruity is a significant effect in Brand Loyalty for the CK brand, but
is not a significant effect for the Chanel brands loyalty. Therefore, H6 is partially
supported. Finally, the results suggest that Brand Attitude is a significant effect in the
Brand Loyalty for both CK and Chanel brands. Therefore, hypothesis seven is
supported.
An examination of variances reveals that Brand Personality Congruity, Brand User
Image Congruity and Brand Usage Imagery Congruity are significantly associated. For
the CK brand, Brand Personality Congruity and Brand User Imagery Congruity have
the highest correlation, followed by the association of Brand Usage Imagery Congruity
and Brand User Imagery Congruity. The lowest association is Brand Usage Imagery
Congruity with Brand Personality Congruity.
For the Chanel brand, Brand Usage Imagery Congruity and Brand User Imagery
Congruity have the highest correlation, followed by the association of Brand Usage
Imagery Congruity with Brand Personality Congruity. Brand Personality Congruity
and Brand User Imagery Congruity have the lowest significant correlation for the CK
brand. Finally, none of the covariates (such as age, gender, and reported expenditures
on non-necessities) is a significant effect in the findings.
Discussion and conclusion
Summary and research implications
Brand User Imagery Congruity and Brand Usage Imagery Congruity are found to be
stronger predictors of attitude and loyalty toward brands than Brand Personality
A study on
luxury brands
931
Table III.
Chanel summary for
each hypothesized path
and covariance
EJM
46,7/8
932
CK) market in multiple product categories, attention should be paid to the core
perceptions of the brand when designing communication strategies for different
categories. Ideally, user and usage imagery should be applied in marketing
communications in order to develop a unique position in the market. However, this
ideal solution may not be viable in many circumstances. For example, it is often
difficult to portray both user and usage imagery in a 30-second commercial. Under
this circumstance, brand managers should carefully consider the differentiating
effects of user and usage imagery in different product categories and select the best
alternative.
Limitations, future studies and conclusion
There are a number of possible limitations that need to be noted beyond the caution
about a limited number of product categories being studied. The sample was only one
of many targets for luxury goods, and only two luxury brands were tested. Students
enrolled in other universities or in other regions of Australia may have different
responses. The scales for self-concept have been shown to be sensitive to use in
different cultures and the perception of these luxury brands.
This study was conducted in a university setting. The respondents views may be
different if the data was collected in another format or venue. Although the average
amount spent on non-essential products was not a significant covariate, their
frequency of purchasing luxury brands was not obtained or accounted for in the
results. Future studies should explore the effects of purchase experience.
The self-congruity concept applied in this study refers to the actual self. Sirgy (1986)
claimed that the effect of actual self is often more important than other types of self,
such as ideal self, social self, or ideal social self. However, due to the strong symbolic
values associated with luxury brands, the effect of ideal or social self may be more
important for luxury brands than that for non-luxury brands. Hence, future studies
may include other types of self to broaden our understanding of the impact of
self-congruity in luxury consumption.
Another interesting future pursuit would be a cross-cultural study. People in a
collectivist society are often more influenced by others than those in an individualistic
society (Hofstede, 2001; Choi et al., 2005). This difference implies that user imagery
may play a more important role than usage imagery or brand personality in a
collectivist society, than in an individualistic society. The current study utilizes a
sample from Australia, a population that is regarded as an individualist culture. A
cross-cultural study including both individualistic and collectivist cultures would be
able to test whether culture has an impact in the relationships tested in this study. As
most luxury brands such as Chanel and CK target consumers globally (Wiedmann
et al., 2007), a cross-cultural study would be able to provide important insights to
luxury brands on the issue of localization vs standardization.
The objective of this study was to examine the combined effects of the three brand
self-congruity concepts of potential buyers in their reported attitude and loyalty
toward luxury fashion brands. The findings show that user and usage imagery are
both more of an effect than their perceptions of the brands personality. These images
appear to be more readily formed than perceptions of other attributes and could be
applied to non-luxury brands and categories to create a competitive advantage over
other competing brands.
A study on
luxury brands
933
EJM
46,7/8
934
References
Aaker, D.A. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing On the Value of a Brand Name, Free
Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, Free Press, New York, NY.
Aaker, J.L. (1997), Dimensions of brand personality, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34
No. 3, pp. 347-56.
Aaker, J.L. (1999), The malleable self: the role of self-expression in persuasion, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 45-57.
Aaker, J.L., Benet-Martinez, V. and Garolera, J. (2001), Consumption symbols as carriers of
culture: a study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 81 No. 3, pp. 492-508.
Aiello, G., Donvito, R., Godey, B., Pederzoli, D., Wiedmann, K., Hennigs, O.N. and Siebels, O.A.
(2009), Luxury brand and country of origin effect: results of an international empirical
study, Journal of Marketing Trends, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 67-75.
Berry, C. (1994), The Idea of Luxury, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Biel, A.L. (1992), How brand image drives brand equity, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 32
No. 6, pp. 6-12.
Chinadaily (2008), Chinas luxury consumption sapped amid global crisis, 13 December,
available at: www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-12/13.htm (accessed 15 March 2011).
Christodoulides, G. and Veloutsou, C. (2009), The impact of self-congruity and brand relations
on brand equity facets, 37th European Marketing Academy Conference (EMAC), 26-29
May, Nantes, France.
Choi, S.M., Lee, W.N. and Kim, H. (2005), Lessons from the rich and famous: a cross-cultural
comparison of celebrity endorsement in advertising, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 85-98.
De Chernatony, L. and Riley, F.D.O. (1998), Modeling the components of the brand, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32 Nos 11/12, pp. 1074-83.
Dick, A.S. and Basu, K. (1994), Customer loyalty: towards an integrated framework, Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 99-113.
Erdem, T., Swait, J. and Valenzuela, A. (2006), Brands as signals: a cross-country validation
study, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 34-49.
Faircloth, J.B., Capella, L.M. and Alford, B.L. (2001), The effect of brand attitude and brand
image on brand equity, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 61-75.
Freling, T.H. and Forbes, L.P. (2005), An examination of brand personality through
methodological triangulation, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 148-62.
Harris, E.G. and Fleming, D.E. (2005), Assessing the human element in service personality
formation: personality congruency and the five factor model, The Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 187-97.
Hauck, W.E. and Stanforth, N. (2007), Cohort perception of luxury goods and services, Journal
of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 175-88.
Heine, K. (2010), Identification and motivation of participants for luxury consumer surveys
through viral participant acquisition, The Electronic Journal of Business Research
Methods, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 132-45.
Helgeson, J.G. and Supphellen, M. (2004), A conceptual and measurement comparison of
self-congruity and brand personality: the impact of socially desirable responding,
International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 205-33.
A study on
luxury brands
935
EJM
46,7/8
936
Parker, B.T. (2005), This brands for me: brand personality and user imagery based
self-congruity, PhD thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Putoni, S. (2000), Self-identity and purchasing intension: an extension of the Theory of Planned
Behavior, in Groeppel-Klien, A. and Esch, F.-R. (Eds), European Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 5, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 130-4.
Shimp, T.A. (2010), Advertising, Promotion, and Other Aspects of Integrated Marketing
Communications, 8th ed., South-Western, Boston, MA.
Sirgy, M.J. (1986), Self-Congruity: Toward a Theory of Personality and Cybernetics, Praeger
Publishers, New York, NY.
Sirgy, M.J., Grewal, D., Mangleburg, T.F. and Park, J.O. (1997), Assessing the predictive validity
of two methods of measuring self-image congruence, Academy of Marketing Science
Journal, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 229-38.
Sirgy, M.J., Lee, D.J., Johar, J.S. and Tidwell, J. (2008), Effects of self-congruity with sponsorship
on brand loyalty, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61 No. 10, pp. 1091-7.
Sotiropoulos, V. (2003), Luxury fashion brands: the impact of embodied imagery on brand
responses, Master of Science thesis, Concordia University, Montreal.
Starr, M.K. and Rubinson, J.R. (1978), A loyalty group segmentation model for brand purchasing
simulation, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 378-83.
Sung, Y.J. and Tinkham, S. (2005), Brand personality structures in the United States and Korea:
common and culture-specific factors, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 4,
pp. 334-50.
Sweeney, J.C. and Bao, J.Y.E. (2009), Comparing factor analytical and circumplex models of
brand personality in brand positioning, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 10,
pp. 927-49.
Unity Marketing (2007), Generations of luxury: what young affluents want and what it means
to luxury marketers, 1 April, available at: www.marketingresearch.com/ (accessed 15 June
2011).
Veblen, T. (1899), Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study in the Evolution of Institutions,
Macmillan, New York, NY.
Vigneron, F. and Johnson, L.W. (1999), A review and a conceptual framework of
prestige-seeking consumer behavior, Academy of Marketing Science Review, No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Wee, T.T.T. (2004), Extending human personality to brands: the stability factor, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 317-30.
Wiedmann, K.P., Hennigs, N. and Siebels, A. (2007), Measuring consumers luxury value
perceptions: a cross-cultural framework, Academy of Marketing Science Review, No. 7,
pp. 1-21.
Yeoman, I. and McMahon-Beattie, U. (2006), Luxury markets and premium pricing, Journal of
Revenue and Pricing Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 319-25.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), The behavioral consequences of service
quality, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 31-46.
About the authors
Dr Fang Liu is an Associate Professor of Marketing in the School of Business, University of
Western Australia. Dr Lius research interests centre on brand strategies, marketing
communications, and cross-cultural consumer behaviour. She has published dozens of
peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and conference proceedings in these areas. Prior to her
academic career, Dr Liu has extensive working experience in the area of international trade.
A study on
luxury brands
937
17. Liezl-Mari Kruger, Stefanie W. Khn, Daniel J. Petzer, Pierre G. Mostert. 2013. Investigating brand
romance, brand attitude and brand loyalty in the cellphone industry. Acta Commercii 13. . [CrossRef]
18. 2013. Loyalty and luxury brands. Strategic Direction 29:2, 31-33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. 2012. How affluent face luxury choices. Strategic Direction 29:1, 6-8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]