Journal af Economic PsychoXogy 10 (1989) 457-472 457

North-Holland

THE IMAGE CONCEPTZ

ITS PLACE IN CON§U_&fER PSYCHOLOGY

Theo B.C. POIESZ *

Tilburg University, The Netherlandr

Received September 2.1988; accepted September I,1989

One of the recent developments in consumer psychology is the growing emphasis on low
involvement consumer behavior. Under a variety of circumstances, consumers are neither capable
nor motivated to elaborate product information. It is assumed that, under these circumstances,
they are likely to make use of product or brand images. This concept is Frequently referred to in
the marketing and marketing research Literature. However, &age is not an unequivocal cancept.
There is lack of agreement on what constitutes an image, on the possibIe psychological functions
of images, on the conditions under which these psychological functions are addressed, and on how
an image should be operationalized. In this paper a review will be provided of the literature on
brand images. An attempt is made to propose a conceptualization and operationalization that is
based on an integration of the literature. Also, a specification will be provided of the psychological
functions that images may have under particular (advertising) conditions.

Organization of the article

First, a brief overview will be presented of the recent developments

in the psychology of consumer behavior. An important theoretical
development concerns the shift of attention from high involvement to
low involvement consumer information processing and decision-mak-
ing behavior. Part of this development is the increasing interest in
brand and corporate images in the area of applied consumer behavior:
marketing and marketing research.
The various conceptualizations of image are presented as they have
appeared in the consumer behavior and marketing literature. The

* The author wants to thank Irwin P. Levin, University of Iowa, for his comments on an earlier
draft, and the reviewers for their highly valued suggestions.
Author’s address: Tb.B.C. Poiesz, Tilburg University, P.U. Box 90153, 5ooO LE Tiiburg, The
Netherlands.

0167-4870/90/$3.50 0 1990, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland)

458 Th.B. C. Poiesz / The image concept

theoretical and practical usefulness of different approaches is dis-

cussed, leading to the presentation of a definition and operationaliza-
tion of images in the context of low involvement behavior. Several
possible psychological functions of images are presented, showing their
practical and methodological relevance for the area of consumer behav-
ior and for a variety of other fields of human behavior.

Earlier developments in the area of consumer psychology

Generally stated, the study of consumer psychology has developed

from a rational choice approach in microeconomics and classical deci-
sion theory, via an emphasis on consumer needs and motivation
research (see e.g., Mostyn 1977), to the so-called hierarchical models of
bounded rationality (e.g., Howard and Sheth 1969; Engel et al. 1973).
In the late sixties and the seventies consumer psychology took on a
cognitive, information processing point of view. The information
processing model regards the consumer as a logical thinker who
acquires, processes, and integrates information to solve problems to
make purchase decisions (e.g., Bettman 1979). In contrast with the
cognitive approach, consumer behavior has also been studied from an
applied behavior approach, using conditioning principles for effectuat-
ing behavior changes (see the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis for
examples).
By the late seventies and early eighties the notion of the consumer as
an information processor and as a problem solver was being ques-
tioned. For example, Olshavsky and Granbois (1979) provide evidence
indicating that many consumer decisions may involve less prepurchase
deliberation than is suggested by the elaborate hierarchical models of
consumer decision making. In the early eighties, Holbrook and Hirsch-
man (1982: 132) state that ‘The information processing perspective has
become so ubiquitous in consumer research that, like fish in water,
many researchers may be relatively unaware of its pervasiveness’.
The gradual shift away from the information processing problem
solver may have been partially due to theoretical developments as they
tend to occur in all disciplines where one development at one particular
point in time is often balanced by or contrasted with an opposing view
at a later point in time. In the area of consumer behavior, however, the
 Th. B.C. Poiesz / The image concept 459

attention shift may also partly be att~buted to changing market

conditions with which consumers are confronted.

Towards a new concept of the consumer in a changing market

Particularly in more recent years, technological and market changes

have made markets increasingly complex and less transparent to con-
sumers. Products and brands have become more homogeneous in the
consumer’s perception, even though these products and brands may be
highly different from a technical point of view. Product information
has become abundant as the result of an increased emphasis on
commercial communication, the availability of new media, and govern-
men t regulation and intervention.
Markets are organized in more complex ways, thus often increasing
the distance between the consumer and the original supplier. Price
policies lead to different prices for the same brand at different distribu-
tion outlets and to the same price for different brands, depending upon
the time and the place. A variety of distribution forms is developed,
increasing the complexity of the market to an even higher degree. Many
Western consumers have the opportunity to shop by mail, telephone or
even by computer. On top of all these new developments, market
structures and instruments keep changing continuously, so that even
the simplest purchase requires considerable motivation, time and en-
ergy on the part of the consumer. That is, if we would conceive of the
consumer as a highly motivated, rational and capable information
processor and problem solver. However, the available information,
inclu~ng the information stored in memory, often tends to be too
much and too complex to handle.
It is not surprising that the increasing complexity of markets, prod-
ucts and information is accompanied by a change in the theorizing on
consumer information processing. Theoretical trends may be noted that
can be viewed as demonstrations of the development towards a new
conceptualization of the consumer. In the consumer behavior literature
an increasing amount of attention is paid to low involvement as
opposed to high involvement decision making. The hierarchical models
of consumer decision making as they appeared in the sixties and early
seventies assumed a highly involved or motivated consumer progressing
through the various stages of problem recognition, information search
460 Th. B. C. Poiesr / The image concept

and evaluation, information integration, purchasing and consumption.

Deviations from the models, such as routinized or habitual behavior,
were considered just that: deviations. The models did allow for these
deviations on the basis of previous elaborate information processing
and decision making. The basic validity and applicability of the models
were not questioned, however.
As indicated, more recently a growing interest can be observed in
limited motivation and information-processing ability of consumers. As
a result, the situation seems to reverse: more and more, extensive
consumer decision making is considered a deviation rather than a rule.
The ‘rational’ problem solver is gradually replaced by a consumer who
tends to process information and to make decisions on the basis of:

_ Normative-affective factors (Etzioni 1988).

- Memory residues of past consumption experiences. ‘By the late
1970’s, consumer researchers had begun to recognize that consumers’
stored knowledge in memory strongly influences their cognitive
processes’ (Walker et al. 1987). The complexity of the knowledge
structure determines the accuracy and efficiency of information
processing (Showers and Cantor 1985). The complexity of the knowl-
edge structure, in its turn, is determined by the extensiveness of
previous information processing, which, as the points presented
earlier have clarified, is likely to be limited.
_ Affect preceding cognition. This issue, originally raised in general
psychology, was also considered in the context of consumer behavior
(Zajonc and Markus 1982; Zajonc 1980). Affect preceding cognition
contrasts the information processing approach to consumer decision
making, as the latter approach requires cognitions to precede affect.
_ Simplifying information cues in attitude change and persuasion
processes as focused upon by Petty and Cacioppo (1984). These
authors suggest a peripheral route to attitude change which leads to
smaller and more temporary attitude change effects than changes
obtained with the central route. The central route of attitude change
reflects the high involvement information processing approach, while
the peripheral route is associated with low involvement. A central
route to attitude change is followed only if a person has the
motivation and the ability to process the information, and the
outcome of information processing is stored in memory.
- Incomplete information. Johnson and Levin (1985), Huber and
 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept 461

McCann (1982), and Meyer (1981. 1982) have studied how con-
sumers make inferences in the case of missing product information.
- Simplified choice rules or heuristics (see e.g., Hoyer 1984).
_ Symbolic information. Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) and Belk et
al. (1982) describe experiential aspects of consumption, focusing on
the symbolic, hedonic and aesthetic nature of consumption. Mick
(1986) and Holbrook (1978) pay attention to the role of semiotics in
consumer behavior.
- Non-conscious processes. The literature reflects an increasing inter-
est in processes that are of a non-conscious nature. ‘Most of the
memory and attention factors that affect our judgement are simply
unavailable to consciousness’ (Lynch and Srull 1982). ‘Most of what
we do goes on unconsciously ( . . .). It is the exception, not the rule,
when thinking is conscious’ (Lachman et al. 1979). According to
Mandler (1984); ‘Consumers may be aware of the outcomes of the
cognitive process - that is, the meanings that are constructed by the
cognitive processes - but they usually are not aware of the automatic
cognitive operations that took place.’

Summarizing these developments, we may note an increasing empha-

sis on limited consumer information processing and on the unconscious
processing of incomplete or simplified information, and simplifying
product symbols and cues. With regard to product and brand concep-
tualizations, there is a parallel shift in attention: away from physical
aspects and functional benefits of products to their symbolic associa-
tions, expressiveness (Swan and Combs 1976) psychosocial aspects
(Liechty and Churchill 1979), intangible aspects (Hirschman 1980), and
surplus product value or augmented product (Enis and Roering 1980).

Image as a central concept

For the marketing practice, the developments that were mentioned

above imply that brand positioning cannot take place on the basis of
intrinsic, functional product characteristics. Instead, brand positioning
should be based (more) upon subjective, attributed characteristics, thus
taking into account symbolic and intangible aspects. For the combina-
tion of these aspects marketing usually refers to the image of a brand
462 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept

(store or company/corporate image). In fact, the term is abundantly

employed in present day marketing practice.
The image term is not only applied in consumer psychology but in
general psychology as well. Here, image or imagery is generally ‘( . . . )
used to refer to a memory code or associative mediator that provides
spatially parallel information that can mediate overt responses without
necessarily being consciously experienced as a visual image’ (Paivio
1971). Finn (1985) views an image as the collection of symbolic
associations with the product. Another definition by Kosslyn (1983)
takes an image ‘as a representation in the mind that gives rise to the
experience of “seeing” in the absence of the appropriate stimulation
from the eye’. Although this definition restricts itself to visual images, it
applies to other senses as well (Mandler 1984). Yet, there is no
generally accepted definition of image in the psychological image/
imagery literature (Lyman 1984).
This latter observation is equally true for the consumer behavior
literature, if not more so. Below are listed a number of conceptualiza-
tions of images/imagery that may overlap in some respects but are
basically dissimilar. Reynolds and Gutman (1984) present the following
list of definitions (note that these are presented by marketing authors):

_ General characteristics, feelings, or impressions (Jain and Etgar

1976);
- Perceptions of products (Lindquist 1974; Marks (1976);
- Beliefs and attitudes (May 1974; James et al. 1976; Hirschmann et
al. 1978);
- Brand personality (Arons 1961; Martineau 1958);
- Linkages between characteristics and feelings/emotions (Oxenfeldt
1974).
To this list of definitions the following may be added:
- Image as subjective knowledge (Boulding 1956);
_ Image as the sum of all product meanings conveyed to the consumer
(Martineau 1957);
- Image as an attitude (Kroeber-Riel 1975; Johannson 1971);
_ Imagery is a processing mode in which multisensory information is
represented in a Gestalt form in working memory (McIrmis and
Price 1987);
- Image as concrete visual representations in memory (Kroeber-Riel
1986);
 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept 463

_ Image as a combination of product aspects that are distinct from the

physical product characteristics but are nevertheless identified with
the product. Examples are the brand name, symbols used in advertis-
ing, endorsement by a well-known figure, and country of origin
{Erickson et al. 1984);
- Image as a hierarchical meaning structure consisting of means-end
(value) chains (Reynolds and Gutman 1984).

It becomes clear that there is no generally accepted definition of

image in the consumer behavior literature, and that different authors
refer to images at different levels of abstraction. Images, as they are
discussed in the literature, range from holistic, general impressions to
very elaborate evaluations of products, brands, stores or companies.

Three general approaches to images

Reviewing the various definitions or approaches as they have been

proposed in the consumer behavior and marketing literature, it seems
possible to place them on different locations on an elaboration con-
tinuum.
Theoretically, it is hard to determine the exact location of each
approach on this continuum. For example, attitudes may be the result
of elaborate or limited cognitive/affective activity. However, if we
combine the various theoretical approaches with their corresponding
operutionalizations, a clearer picture emerges. That is, some operation-
alizations require a level of elaboration that does not seem to allow the
corresponding concepts to be placed on the low elaboration end of the
continuum.
Then, if we were to combine theory and operationalization, we may
identify three basic views on image, ranging from high elaboration
through medium to low elaboration.
The approach suggested by Reynolds and Gutman (1984) can be
viewed as a high elaboration approach. Their image concept will be
briefly described, to be followed by an explanation as to why this
reflects a high elaboration orientation. Reynolds and Gutman define an
image as a network of meanings stored in memory. The meanings of
the elements at issue are ‘derived in terms of their connection to the
self, thus serving to modify self’ (1984: 28-29). They employ a
464 Th. B. C. Poiesr / The image concept

means-end chain orientation to the definition and operationalization

of images. This means-end chain, in its turn, is defined as the connec-
tion between product attributes, consumer consequences, and personal
values. Operationally, Kelly’s (1955) Repertory Grid technique is used
to elicit distinctions consumers make among products at the attribute
level. A series of directed probes obtain higher levels of abstraction.
This technique, called luddering (see also Reynolds and Gutman 1988),
sequentially probes into why a particular distinction is important to the
consumer/ research participant. Linkages connecting attributes to con-
sequences and finally to personal values are uncovered.
Reynolds and Gutman’s orientation may be seen as a high elabora-
tion approach for several reasons. First, Kelly’s (1955) Repertory Grid
assumes the presence of perceived and relevant brand distinctions on
the part of the consumer. The triadic sorting task demands that the
respondents generate product differences even when they might not
perceive the products to be different at all. In addition, any differences
that are produced are likely to be artificially magnified as a function of
demand characteristics related to the researcher-respondent interac-
tion. Second, the possibly blown-up distinctions serve as the material
for deriving higher-order meanings or functions. The laddering proce-
dure assumes that these higher-order meanings are cognitively available
to the respondent and will be revealed correctly if such a request is
made. One may object, however, that research techniques such as the
laddering technique may produce ‘instant thinking’, ‘forced responses’
or (re)constructions on the part of the respondent, again as the *possible
result of demand characteristics.
Based upon low involvement theorizing, we may assume psychologi-
cal distinctions for many product classes to be either non-existent,
marginal, not consciously available, unavailable in a verbal manner, or
subjectively irrelevant. A forced response method seems inappropriate
for such products and brands. Therefore, the means-end or laddering
approach to images would be appropriate only for products that
consumers have elaborately thought about. That is, if we want to use
the image concept at all in the case of high elaboration, which is an
issue that will be addressed later.
A second approach to images is to view these as the theoretical and
operational equivalent of attitudes in the Fishbein (1967) tradition, in
which attitudes are viewed as a function of the combination of salient
beliefs and belief evaluations. Kroeber-Riel(l975) is one of the authors
 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept 465

who propose to make no distinction between attitudes and images. This

approach to images can be placed between the high and low elabora-
tion extremes of the elaboration continuum, because beliefs may be
descriptive, informational and inferential in nature (Fishbein and Ajzen
1975), thus allowing for more or less elaboration to take place. Often,
however, attitude research itself is likely to generate more elaboration
than the consumer actually shows when forming an attitude in real
circumstances. Reynolds and Gutman note: ‘The problems with these
(multivariate, note by author) models with respect to studying image,
center on the fact that they use a predetermined set of items that are
not guaranteed of either being important to respondents, or even of
being expressed in terms meaningful to the respondents’ (1984: 30).
Similarly, beliefs may not be salient or even present (Ehrenberg 1974;
Ryan and Bonfield 1975; Lastovicka and Bonfield 1982).
Thus, attitude research procedures tend to stimulate elaboration to
at least some extent. Salient beliefs are to be produced by the respon-
dent and each belief is to be evaluated on an x-point scale so that
trade-offs must be made between scale positions. Again, this operation
may be very unlike the way affective reactions are formed in real life.
The only reactions attitude research procedures seem to apply to are
the reactions that result from some cognitive elaboration on the object
or issue under consideration.
The third approach to images focuses more exclusively upon images
as general, holistic impressions or perceptions of the relative position of
a brand (product/corporation/store) among its perceived competitors.
The relative position refers to the location of the brand on one or more
dimensions that are used to identify and classify the objects under
consideration. Because of the nature of the identification or classifica-
tion process, the number of dimensions is likely to be limited to one or
two only. This approach, if accompanied by an appropriate operation-
alization, may be located at the low end of the elaboration continuum.
An affectively toned dimension may be either present or absent, but if
present, should not be viewed as the result of cognitive elaboration. If a
set of competing brands is considered at all, it consists of only those
brands that are subjectively perceived as being related somehow to the
brand under consideration. Low elaboration implies here that very few
brands will be taken as reference points. This approach may be
operationalized by describing the brand’s relative position in terms of
the coordinates in a perceptual space. Multidimensional scaling (MDS),
466 Th.B. C. Poiesz / The image concep!

based on similarity judgments, may be used to reveal the perceptual

space and the relative locations of the different brands. (When cate-
gorizing stimuli people essentially make similarity judgments (Medin
and Smith 1984).) Basically, in a low elaboration apporach, consumers
should be required to give responses as simple as possible. Examples
are responses at a nominal level of measurement, such as yes/no
responses. Response latencies may be helpful in the assessment of
top-of-mind awareness of brands and attributes. Note that the respon-
dent is not required to deliberately think about or verbalize the
dimensions that are used for similarity judgments. If requested to try to
verbalize, the indicated dimensions may even turn out to be different
from the ones that show up in the MIX results.
To recapitulate, the consumer behavior and marketing literature
suggest three basic approaches to images with accompanying oper-
ationalizations. These approaches may be placed at different locations
on the elaboration dimension: high, intermediate and low elaboration.
According to the various approaches in the literature, images can be
conceived as comprising all possible combinations of perceptions,
attitudes and personal meaning, thus ranging from the low to the high
extremes of the elaboration dimension. This is tantamount to saying
that there is considerable confusion as to how images should be
conceived. In part, this confusion is due to an overlap with other
concepts. At the high end of the elaboration axis, the image concept
seems to overlap with the concept of means-end chains, and at the
intermediate range, images seem to coincide with attitudes. The rule of
scientific parsimony requires, however, that researchers should prevent
to label a particular effect, process or phenomenon in more than une
idiosyncratic way. In our interpretation, this would mean that with
regard to the image concept a choice should be made. At the high and
intermediate section of the elaboration continuum images overlap with
other concepts. At the low end of this continuum there is no alternative
concept than the image concept. Therefore, for sake of parsimony> it
seems valid to reserve the image concept for the low elaboration part of
the continuum. (We might, alternatively, identify images that differ as
to their elaboratedness. However, this option would merely add to the
existing confusion, as the same might be suggested for attitudes.)
There are more arguments for locating the image concept at the low
end of the continuum. First, doing so would be in line with the way
{sensory) imagery research has been developed. The bulk of research on
 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept 461

imagery has examined imagery experiences that fall at the lower end of
the elaboration continuum (McInnis and Price 1987). This does not
mean, however, that the image concept as employed in the field of
consumer behavior is synonymous with the concept of imagery. The
holistic impression that is called an image here may not contain sensory
representations in memory. There is no conceptual confusion if imug-
cry is reserved for these sensory representations (as is suggested by
McInms and Price (1987)), and images for holistic impressions of
which imagery may only form a component.
The third argument for locating the image concept at the low end of
the elaboration axis is that specific methods and analytic techniques are
available that allow for the assessment of holistic perceptions under
conditions of low consumer elaboration. These have been referred to
above. The methods and techniques have been proven useful and are
supplementary in that they may provide information that cannot be
provided by the methods used for the assessment of attitudes and
means-end chains. Thus, image may be distinguished theoretically,
operationally and analytically from its neighboring concepts.

General implications

In this article it is suggested that the image concept should be used

to refer to the holistic impression of the relative position of a brand
among its perceived competitors. The holistic nature refers to the
limited number of dimensions on which the relative position is estab-
lished and to the ease with which these dimensions are used in the
brand identification and classification process. The holistic impression
may have sensory (imagery), cognitive, and/or affective aspects. Any
type of these aspects, or any combination of these aspects may be
absent for a particular brand. (At the same time, ‘holistic’ does not
necessarily exclude the possibility of a halo effect.)
What, then, is to be gained theoretically and/or practically from the
distinction between images on the one hand and attitudes and
means-end chains on the other hand? Or, in other words, can idiosyn-
cratic functions of images be identified? Several possible functions of
images as conceived of here may be suggested:

- An image may serve to reduce the extensiveness and complexity of

information processing, storage and retrieval. For these effects, Lilli
468 Th. B. C. Poresz / The image concept

(1983) specifies the knowledge function, the expectation function

and the consistency function of images.
- An image may function as a precursor or gatekeeper to more
extensive elaboration. A positive holistic impression may increase
the likelihood of attention to and interest in information on the
object. Similarly, a negative holistic impression may guide selective
attention and perception processes.
- An image may serve as a heuristic, a simplifying choice rule, in low
involvement decision making. Similarly, an image may possibly serve
as a persuasion cue if a peripheral route to attitude change is being
followed (see, e.g., Petty and Cacioppo 1984). If the motivation
and/or the information processing ability are low, images might
function as persuasion cues to generate a small and temporary
attitude change. Holistic impressions of a brand or of a corporation
may suggest the quality of the message presented, without its argu-
ments being read. From the image, inferences are made as to how
the message should be interpreted. A more permanent attitude
change may result after frequent confrontations with the image.

Summarizing, what can image theory and research possibly offer to

the area of consumer behavior? As a first point we may make the
general remark that it is necessary to introduce and theoretically
develop concepts that specifically deal with low involvement informa-
tion processing and decision making. In this paper, the image concept
has been proposed to be such a concept. As a second point, theoretical
distinctions between concepts that differ in the amount of elaboration
involved should be accompanied by methods that allow for the same
amount of elaboration. More specifically, researchers should avoid to
employ elaboration stimulating research methods for studying behav-
iors that are characterized by little elaboration. Obviously, this point
applies to image research as well. (See, e.g,. Poiesz and Pieters (1987)
for suggestions as to how to avoid artificial respondent involvement in
research settings.)

Other possible areas of application

What possible areas can be indicated in which an image approach

may be fruitful? Here, several possible areas are suggested without
 Th.B.C. Poiesr / The image concept 469

claiming that the overview is complete. Nor is it suggested that a low

elaboration approach is the only appropriate one. The point to be made
is that we may have to distinguish between individuals that do and
individuals that do not have the motivation and ability to elaborately
process the information which is relevant for their judgments and
decisions. Possible areas are:

- Areas in which judgments or decisions have to be made on the basis

of very complex, conflicting and/or incomplete information, or on
the basis of a very large amount of information. We may refer to, for
example, the areas of medicine (diagnostics), business, government,
law, stock market, gambling, and personnel assessment. (Obviously,
decisions based on images may be very risky decisions);
_ Areas in which there may not be enough motivation to elaborately
process information because of the low personal relevance of the
persons, objects or issues, for example information on many types of
companies, products and services, and political candidates;
_ Areas where specific knowledge necessary to judge the persons,
objects or issues under consideration is lacking;
_ Areas which are characterized by limiting external conditions, such
as time limitations, stressful circumstances, and auditory and visual
distractions from the primary task.

Possible limitations such as the ones described here are frequent

enough to warrant a closer look at how consumers cope with them.
Here, the use of images is likely to be useful. And as such, it may also
prove to be a valuable instrument in the search for explanations of
consumer behavior.

References

Arons, L., 1961. Does television viewing influence store image and shopping frequency? Journal of
Retailing 37,1-13.
Belk, R.W., K. Bahn and R. Mayer, 1982. Developmental recognition of consumption symbolism.
Journal of Consumer Research 9, 4-17.
Bettman, J., 1979. An information processing approach of consumer choice. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Bettman, J., 1986. Consumer psychology. Annual Review of Psychology 37, 257-290.
Boulding, K.E., 1956. The image. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
470 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept

Ehrenberg, A.S.C., 1974. Repetitive advertising and the consumer. Journal of Advertising Re-
search 14, 25-34.
Engel, J.F., D. T. Kollat and R.D. Blackwell, 1973. Consumer behavior. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden
Press.
Enis, B.M. and K.J. Roering, 1980. ‘Product classification taxonomies: Synthesis and consumer
implications’. In: C.W. Lamb and P.M. Dunne (eds.), Theoretical developments in marketing.
Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association. pp. 186-189.
Erickson, G.M., J.K. Johannson and P. Chao, 1984. Image variables in multiattribute product
evaluations: Country-of-origin effects. Journal of Consumer Research 11, 694-699.
Etzioni, A., 1988. Normative-affective factors: Toward a new decision-making model. Journal of
Economic Psychology 9, 125-151.
Finn, A., 1985. ‘A theory of the consumer evaluation process for new product concepts’. In: J.N.
Sheth (ed.), Research in Consumer Behavior 1, 35-65.
Fishbein, M., 1967. ‘A behavior theory approach to the relations between beliefs about an object
and the attitude toward that object’. In: M. Fishbein (ed.), Readings in attitude theory and
measurement. New York: Wiley. pp. 398-400.
Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen, 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to
theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hirschman, E., 1980. ‘Attitudes of attributes and layers of meaning’. In: J.C. Olson (ed.),
Advances in consumer research. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research. pp.
7-12.
Hirschman, E.C., B. Greenberg and D.H. Robertson, 1978. The intermarket reliability of retail
image research: An empirical examination. Journal of Retailing 54, 3-12.
Holbrook, M.B., 1978. Beyond attitude structure: Toward the informational determinants of
attitude. Journal of Marketing Research 25, 545-556.
Holbrook, M.B. and E. Hirschman, 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer
phantasies, feelings and fun. Journal of Consumer Research 9, 132-140.
Howard, J.A. and J.N. Sheth, 1969. The theory of buyer behavior. New York: Wiley.
Hoyer, W.D., 1984. An examination of consumer decision making for a common repeat purchase
product. Journal of Consumer Research 11, 822-829.
Huber, J. and J. McCann, 1982. The impact of inferential beliefs on product evaluations. Journal
of Marketing Research 19, 324-333.
Jain, A.K. and M. Etgar, 1976-1977. Measuring store image through multidimensional scaling of
free response data. Journal of Retailing 52, 61-70.
James, D.L., R.M. Durand and R.A. Dreves, 1976. The use of a multiattribute attitude model in a
store image study. Journal of Retailing 52, 23-32.
Johannson, U., 1971. Das Marken- und Firmenimage; Theorie, Methodik, Praxis. Berlin: Duncker
& Humbolt.
Johnson, R.D. and I.P. Levin, 1985. More than meets the eye: The effect of missing information
on purchase evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research 12, 169-177.
Kelly, G.A., 1955. The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.
Kosslyn, S.M., 1983. Ghost’s in the mind’s machine. New York: Norton.
Kroeber-Riel, W., 1975. Konsumentenverhalten. Mlinchen: Vahlens Handbiicher der Wirtschaft
und Sozialwissenschaft.
Kroeber-Riel, W., 1986. Die inneren Bilder der Konsumenten. Messung, Verhaltenswirkung,
Konzequenzen fur das Marketing. Zeitschrift fiir Forschung und Praxis 2, 81-96.
Lachman, R., J.L. La&man and E.C. Butterfield, 1979. Cognitive psychology and information
processing: An introduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lastovicka, J.L. and E.H. Bonfield, 1982. Do consumers have brand attitudes? Journal of
Economic Psychology 2, 57-75.
 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept 411

Licchty, M.G. and G.A. Churchill, 1979, ‘Conceptual insights into consumer satisfaction with
services’. In: N. Beckwith et al. (eds.), Educators’ conference proceedings. Chicago, IL:
American Marketing Association. pp. 509-515.
Lilli, W., 1983. ‘Perzeption, Kognition, Image’. In: M. Irle and W. Bussman (eds.), Handbuch der
Psychologie, 12. Band, 1. Halbband. Marktpsychologie als Sozialwissenschaft. Gottingen:
Verlag ftir Psychologie. pp. 402-471.
Lindquist, J.D., 1974. Meaning of image: A survey of empirical and hypothetical evidence.
Journal of Retailing 50, 29-38.
Lyman, B., 1984. An experiential theory of emotion; A partial outline with implications for
research. Journal of Mental Imagery 8, 77-86.
Lynch, J.G. and T.K. Srull, 1982. Memory and attentional factors in consumer choice: Concepts
and research methods. Journal of Consumer Research 9, 18-37.
McInms, D.J. and L.L. Price, 1987. The role of information processing: Review and extensions.
Journal of Consumer Research 13, 473-491.
Mandler, G., 1984. Consciousness, imagery, and emotion - With special reference to automatic
imagery. Journal of Mental Imagery 8, 87-94.
Marks, R.B., 1976. Operationalizing the concept of store image. Journal of Retailing 52, 37-46.
Martineau, P., 1957. Motivation in advertising. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Martineau, P., 1958. The personality of the retail store. Harvard Business Review 36, 47-55.
May, E.G. 1974-1975. Practical applications of recent retail image research. Journal of Retailing
50, 15-20.
Medin, D.L. and E.E. Smith, 1984. Concepts and concept formation. Annual Review of Psy-
chology 35, 113-138.
Meyer, R.J., 1981. A model of multiattribute judgements under uncertainty and informational
contraints. Journal of Marketing Research 18, 428-441.
Meyer, R.J., 1982. A descriptive model of consumer information search behavior. Marketing
Science 1, 93-121.
Mick, D.G., 1986. Consumer research and semiotics: Exploring the morphology of signs, symbols,
and significance. Journal of Consumer Research 13, 196-213.
Mostyn, B., 1977. Motivational research: Passing fad or permanent feature? Bradford: MCB.
Olshavsky, R.W. and D.H. Granbois, 1979. Consumer decision making - Fact or fiction? Journal
of Consumer Research 6, 93-100.
Oxenfeldt, A.R., 1974. Developing a favorable price-quality image. Journal of Retailing 50, 8-14.
Paivio, A., 1971. Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Petty, R.E. and J.T. Cacioppo, 1982. The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 42, 116-131.
Petty, R.E. and J.T. Cacioppo, 1984. ‘Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: Application to
advertising’. In: L. Percy and A.G. Woodside, (eds.), Advertising and consumer psychology.
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Petty, R.E. and J.T. Cacioppo, 1986. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral
routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Poiesz, Th.B.C. and R. Pieters, 1987. ‘Consumer involvement: theoretical illusion or practical
fact?’ In: P. Leeflang and M. Rice (eds.), Contemporary research in marketing. Toronto: York
University. pp. 20-37.
Reynolds, T.J. and J. Gutman, 1984. Advertising is image management. Journal of Advertising
Research 24, 21-37.
Reynolds, T.J. and J. Gutman, 1988. Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation.
Journal of Advertising Research 28, 11-31.
Ryan, M.J. and E.H. Bonfield, 1975. The Fishbein-extended model and consumer behavior.
Journal of Consumer Research 2, 118-136.
472 Th. B. C. Poiesz / The image concept

Showers, C. and N. Cantor, 1985. Social cognition. A look at motivated strategies. Annual Review
of Psychology 36, 275-305.
Swan, J.E. and L.J. Combs, 1976. Product performance and consumer satisfaction: A new
concept. Journal of Marketing 40, 25-33.
Walker, B,, R. Celsi and J. Olson, 1987. ‘Exploring the structural characteristics of consumers’
knowledge’. In: M. Wallendorf and P. Anderson, (eds.) Advances in consumer research. Provo,
UT. pp. 17-21.
Zajonc, R.B., 1980. Feeling and thinking: References need no inferences. American Psychologist
35,151-175.
Zajonc, R.B. and H. Markus, 1982. Affective and cognitive factors in preferences. Journal of
Consumer Research 9, 123-131.