BRAND DYNAMICS:

THE EFFECTS OF BRAND PERSONALITY AND BRAND EXPERIENCE

ON EMOTIONAL BRAND ATTACHMENT

by

Keizo Ishikawa

B.A., Keio University, 1994

M.A., Rikkyo University, 1997

A Dissertation
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Business Administration

in the Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
August 2013
 UMI Number: 3604360

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3604360
Published by ProQuest LLC (2013). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
Copyright by Keizo Ishikawa, 2013
All Rights Reserved
 DISSERTATION APPROVAL

BRAND DYNAMICS: THE EFFECTS OF BRAND PERSONALITY AND BRAND

EXPERIENCE ON EMOTIONAL BRAND ATTACHMENT

by

Keizo Ishikawa

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in the field of Business Administration

Approved by:

Terry Clark, Chair

Mavis Adjei

John Summey

Edward Nowlin

Matt Rendleman

Graduate School
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
May 13, 2013
 AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF

Keizo Ishikawa, for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in Business Administration, presented on
May 13, 2013, at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.

TITLE: BRAND DYNAMICS: THE EFFECTS OF BRAND PERSONALITY AND BRAND

EXPERIENCE ON EMOTIONAL BRAND ATTACHMENT

MAJOR PROFESSOR: Dr. Terry Clark

Marketers have long observed, or at least assumed, that people buy certain products or

brands as a means of expressing themselves. Marketing researchers have studied this

phenomenon from the perspective of self-congruity, assuming that a fit between the

consumers understanding of self (i.e., self-image) and the brands image (or brand

personality) should drive the consumers purchase behavior. This stream of research has

vigorously explored the relations between the fit (i.e., self-brand image congruity or self-

congruity) and various behavioral outcomes. Nonetheless, this research stream has not

succeeded in finding clear and strong evidence of the assumed effects on such a vital outcome as

emotional brand attachment. Moreover, little research has directly explored the relations between

self-congruity and emotional brand attachment.

In this context, the main purpose of this dissertation is to shed light on this little

understood relationship. Specifically, this research proposes that consumers brand experience

and self-congruity jointly create the strong driving force that directs consumers to an emotional

attachment to the brands. Here, brand experience is conceptualized as the positive impact of

brand-related stimuli or the magnitude of consumer responses to the stimuli that reflects a

consumers past interactions with brands or brand-related information. On the other hand, self-

congruity can be understood as the direction that indicates which brand image a consumer

wants to go with. The existing research has focused exclusively on the direction. Taking the

i
magnitude into account, this research aims to develop the theory that explains the assumed

effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment as well as clearly demonstrate the effects,

by proposing the interaction effects between self-congruity and brand experience.

By synthesizing multiple research streams that have been recently growing, a

comprehensive explanation was developed to explicate how consumers perception of self-brand

image fit and their past interactions with brands affect the formation of emotional brand

attachment. In order to test the hypotheses that were derived from the theory, data were collected

from 397 U.S. consumers using an online survey. The proposed interaction effects were clearly

detected, along with the direct effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment, which

the previous study had not been able to identify. The research revealed that brand experience

boosts the positive effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment.

ii
 DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to my brother Ichiro and my father Tomohisa in heaven, and to

my mother Yachie who always made selfless sacrifices to support me while facing unbearable

hardships.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would first like to express my deepest gratitude to a great marketing philosopher and

my committee chair person, Professor Terry Clark. His thoughtful and considerate support

throughout my career in the doctoral program always saved me from countless hardships and

critical situations. Without his generosity, I would not have been able to stay here now, let alone

complete the dissertation. I also would like to thank the other professors on my dissertation

committee for their invaluable help. A distinguished educator, Professor John Summey,

consistently provided me with a multitude of precious opportunities and advice to improve my

teaching skills, while graciously placing his trust in my work and academic performance.

Professor Mavis Adjei generously offered invaluable support by supervising the methodology

and statistical analysis in my study. Her favors were indispensable to me in moving forward

especially in the steps after the dissertation proposal. Professor Edward Nowlin never hesitated

to share his time and energy whenever I asked for his advice and cooperation to get through

difficult issues at various stages in the dissertation process. Professor Charles Rendleman saved

me by graciously participating in the dissertation committee at the last minute. I wish to express

my sincere gratitude to all of these professors once again.

I am also grateful for the unselfish assistances provided by my fellow doctoral students

and friends. Especially, Dr. Carol Azab consistently helped me anytime I faced a serious

hardship. Also, Tyson always encouraged me to move forward beyond daunting dilemmas.

Finally, I would like to thank all the members of the marketing family. Although I might

not have been able to express my appreciation enough, I fully recognize that I would never have

been able to make the summit without any of your help.

My achievement is your achievement. Thank you.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... i

DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................x

CHAPTERS

CHAPTER 1 Introduction.................................................................................................1

1.1 Purpose and Importance of the Study ................................................................1

1.2 Sub-Objectives and Research Questions ...........................................................3

1.3 Scope and Limitation of the Study.....................................................................4

1.4 Potential Contributions ......................................................................................6

1.5 Outline of the Dissertation .................................................................................9

1.6 Key Conceptual Definitions .............................................................................10

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................................................12

2.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................12

2.2 The Concept of Emotional Brand Attachment.................................................12

2.2.1 Attachment ........................................................................................13

2.2.2 Emotional Brand Attachment ...........................................................14

2.3 Self-Congruity..................................................................................................16

2.3.1 The Concept of The Self ...............................................................17

v
 2.3.2 Self-Congruity...................................................................................19

2.3.3 Self-Congruity and Emotional Brand Attachment ............................22

2.3.3.1 Ideal Self-Congruity and Self-Enhancement .....................24

2.3.3.2 Actual Self-Congruity and Self-Verification .....................27

2.4 Brand Experience .............................................................................................30

2.4.1 The Concept of Brand Experience ....................................................31

2.4.2 Brand Experience and Self-Expansion .............................................34

2.5 Interaction Effect of Self-Congruity and Brand Experience............................41

2.6 Outcomes of Emotional Brand Attachment .....................................................46

2.6.1 Willingness to Pay a Brand Premium ...............................................46

2.6.2 Likelihood of Positive Word of Mouth .............................................47

2.7 Model Summary...............................................................................................48

CHAPTER 3 Research Methodology .............................................................................53

3.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................53

3.2 Research Design...............................................................................................53

3.2.1 Sample Characteristics ......................................................................53

3.2.2 The Focal Brands ..............................................................................54

3.3 Data Collection ................................................................................................56

3.3.1 Procedure for Pretest Selection of Focal Brands ...........................56

3.3.2 Procedure for Main Study .................................................................60

3.4 Operationalization of Constructs .....................................................................61

3.5 Assessment of Validity and Reliability............................................................65

3.6 Statistical Analyses ..........................................................................................67

vi
CHAPTER 4 Analysis and Results .................................................................................71

4.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................71

4.2 Pretest: Selection of Focal Brands ...................................................................71

4.2.1 Data Collection .................................................................................72

4.2.2 Results ...............................................................................................72

4.3 Main Study .......................................................................................................75

4.3.1 Data Collection .................................................................................75

4.3.2 Assessment of the Measurement Models ..........................................79

4.3.3 Structural Model Analysis and Hypothesis Testing..........................83

4.3.3.1 Ideal Self-Congruity (ISC) Model .....................................83

4.3.3.2 Actual Self-Congruity (ASC) Model .................................87

CHAPTER 5 Discussion and Conclusion .......................................................................93

5.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................93

5.2 Summary of the Study......................................................................................93

5.2.1 Summary of Background Literature and Purpose of the Study ........93

5.2.2 Summary of Methodology ................................................................94

5.2.2.1 Hypotheses .........................................................................94

5.2.2.2 Research Methodology ......................................................95

5.2.3 Summary of Results ..........................................................................96

5.3 Discussion ........................................................................................................96

5.3.1 Implications of Findings ...................................................................96

5.3.2 Theoretical Contributions ...............................................................100

5.3.3 Managerial Implications .................................................................103

vii
 5.3.4 Limitation and Future Research ......................................................105

5.4 Conclusion .....................................................................................................108

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................109

APPENDICES

Appendix A Scale Items used in the Pretest Survey .....................................................124

Appendix B Scale Items used in the Main Study Survey .............................................125

VITA ..........................................................................................................................................132

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

Table 1.1 Key Conceptual Definitions...........................................................................................10

Table 2.1 List of Research Hypotheses..........................................................................................52

Table 4.1 Pretest Data Sample Characteristics ..............................................................................73

Table 4.2 Public/Private Consumption and Expected Period of Use.............................................74

Table 4.3 Brand Awareness and Brand Familiarity .......................................................................75

Table 4.4 Main Study Data Sample Characteristics ......................................................................78

Table 4.5 Purification Process of the Measurement Model Brand Experience ..........................80

Table 4.6 Reliability Measure and Average Variance Extracted (AVE)

- Brand Experience .......................................................................................................82

Table 4.7 Factor Correlation Matrix with square root of AVE Brand Experience .....................82

Table 4.8 Reliability Measure and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) 6 constructs................84

Table 4.9 Factor Correlation Matrix with square root of AVE 6 constructs ..............................84

Table 4.10 Summary of Results in Hypothesis Testing.................................................................92

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

Figure 2.1 Development of Interaction Process with a Brand .......................................................36

Figure 2.2 Brand Experience and Self-Expansion Process ............................................................42

Figure 2.3 General Conceptual Framework ...................................................................................50

Figure 2.4 Conceptual Models and Proposed Hypotheses.............................................................51

Figure 3.1 Hypothesis Testing Models for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) ........................70

Figure 4.1 Results of Hypothesis Testing (SEM): ISC Model ......................................................86

Figure 4.2 ISC X BE Interaction Plot and Estimated Group Means of BA...................................88

Figure 4.3 Results of Hypothesis Testing (SEM): ASC Model .....................................................89

Figure 4.4 ASC X BE Interaction Plot and Estimated Group Means of BA .................................91

x
 1

CHAPTER 1

IINTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Importance of the Study

Marketers have long observed, or at least assumed, that people buy certain products or

brands as a means of expressing themselves (e.g., Sirgy, 1982; Aaker, 1999). With regard to this

phenomenon, researchers in social and personality psychology have pointed out that consumers

identify themselves with those characteristics of brands that reflect their ideal or actual self-

images (Kleine, Kleine, and Kernan, 1993; Belk, 1988; Kassarjian, 1971; Kernan and Sommers,

1967). Partly drawing from their works, marketing researchers have studied the phenomenon

from the perspective of self-congruity (Sirgy, 1982; 1986), assuming that a fit between the

consumers understanding of self (i.e., self-image) and the brands image (or personality-like

characteristics) should drive the consumers purchase behavior. This stream of research has

explored the relations between self-brand image congruity and various behavioral outcomes,

such as brand attitude, brand preference, purchase intention, brand loyalty, brand attachment, and

so on (e.g., Sirgy, 1985; Kressman et al., 2006; Malar et al., 2011). Nonetheless, this research

stream has not succeeded in finding clear and strong evidence of the assumed effects on such a

vital outcome as emotional brand attachment.

In this context, emotional brand attachment (Thomson, MacInnis, and Park, 2005) has

attracted considerable attention in recent years, since it is considered a critical determinant of

brand loyalty (e.g., Grisaffe and Nguyen, 2011; Swaminathan et al., 2009). Also, emotional

attachment has been found to be a much more significant predictor of purchase intention than

brand attitude, a concept that has been studied as the main antecedent of purchase behavior (Park
 2

et al., 2010). However, little research has directly explored the relations between self-brand

image congruity and emotional brand attachment (see, Malar et al., 2011, for example). Research

thus far in this stream found only weak evidence of the supposed relationship between self-image

congruity and emotional brand attachment (i.e., it has not supported the relationship between

ideal self-image congruity and the attachment).

In this context, the main purpose of this dissertation is to shed light on this little

understood relationship. This research proposes that brand experience (Brakus, Schmitt, and

Zarantonello, 2009) interacts with self-congruity, determining the intensity of the subsequent

emotional brand commitment. Here, brand experience is conceptualized as the positive impact of

brand stimuli, or the magnitude of consumer responses evoked by the stimuli (Brakus et al.,

2009). Specifically, the impact is considered to reflect a consumers past direct or indirect

interactions with a brand or the related information. On the other hand, self-congruity can be

understood as the direction that indicates which brand image a consumer wants to go with.

Considering the natures of the two concepts, it is reasonably expected that both jointly create the

strong (and detectable) driving force that directs consumers to the subsequent emotional

attachment to the brands, as discussed later. Indeed, Park et al. (2010) claim that brand

attachment is characterized by brand-self connection and prominence or strong accessibility in

memory. The existing research has focused exclusively on the direction (i.e., self-congruity),

leading to only weak evidence thus far. Taking the magnitude (i.e., brand experience) into

account, this research aims to clearly demonstrate the assumed effects of self-congruity on

emotional brand attachment, by proposing the interaction effects between self-congruity and

brand experience.
 3

1.2 Sub-Objectives and Research Questions

To achieve this goal, the objectives of this research are fourfold. First, the research

examines the direct effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment, which previous

research touched upon but could not sufficiently support (e.g., Malar et al., 2011). Second, the

research investigates the direct effects of brand experience on emotional brand attachment. As

briefly mentioned above, brand experience is assumed to reflect consumers past direct and

indirect experiences with brands as a whole. Thus far, marketing research has in general ignored

the effect of consumers past experiences with brands on emotional brand attachment (or the

related concepts), although an emotional attachment develops over time through past interactions

(Thomson et al., 2005; Park et al., 2010) (an exception is Kressmann et al., (2006), which

explored consumers usage experience and the influences on brand relationship quality). Aiming

to fill the critical gap, this research delves into the effects of consumers overall experiences with

brands on emotional brand attachment by employing the concept of brand experience. Third, this

research examines the interaction effects of brand experience and self-congruity on emotional

brand attachment, which also no previous research has examined yet. In these effects, it is

proposed that self-congruity and brand experience amplify the effects each other. Finally, in

addition to these main objectives, this research also inquires the positive effects of emotional

brand attachment on its two behavioral outcomes - willingness to pay a brand premium and

likelihood of positive word of mouth - aiming at enhancing practical implications of the findings

as a whole. These outcomes can specifically reflect consumers' commitment to or investment to

their relationship with attached brands, which are purported to emerge from emotional brand

attachment as its distinctive consequences (Thomson et al., 2005), so are especially suitable for

the current purpose.

 4

On the basis of the objectives discussed above, this research aims to answer the following

research questions.

1. Does (ideal or actual) self-congruity affect emotional brand attachment?

2. Does brand experience affect emotional brand attachment?

3. Do (ideal or actual) self-congruity and brand experience jointly affect emotional brand

attachment?

4. Does emotional brand attachment affect willingness to pay a brand premium and

likelihood of positive word of mouth?

1.3 Scope and Limitation of the Study

The main interest in this research is self-expressive or symbolic benefits of brands (Keller,

1993; Aaker, 1997). Accordingly, the scope of analysis and interpretation in this study is limited

to their self-expressive nature and, basically, functional benefits (Keller, 1993; Katz, 1960) of

target brands or products are not argued. This emphasis is especially important in the discussion

regarding consumers experiences with brands. Such experiences may be accompanied by the

consumers learning as to functional features of specific product categories, their involvement in

as well as familiarity with those categories, or even their expertise in the domains (Hutchinson

and Eisenstein, 2008). However, in the current context, the analysis and interpretation do not

refer to those aspects and the scope is limited to such facets of consumers experiences that form

their overall impressions of those brands. For example, a certain brand may form strong

impressions in consumers minds and the images may evoke intense arousals relevant to their

personal goals or orientations, even when those individuals are not familiar with that product

category. The interest is in such emotional or symbolic natures of brands that may serve
 5

consumers self-expressive needs and their functional features and the related outcomes (e.g.,

familiarity, expertise) are outside the scope of the analysis and interpretation, here.

Regarding the target brands, the current study has also its scope and limitation. First,

this study mainly deals with relatively durable goods or product brands. The basic reason that

fast-moving consumer goods are eliminated is the following. One of the basic assumptions in

this study is that individuals social roles influence their perception of brands, ultimately

affecting the formation of emotional brand attachment, the major dependent variable here. As for

fast-moving consumer goods (e.g., beer, perfume), Aaker (1999) found that consumers

information processing is susceptible to temporal influence of their situations. Accordingly, the

effect of individuals social roles is less likely to be detectable in such categories than durable

goods that are not easily replaced depending on such transitory impacts. Other brand categories

such as service or retail store brands are also outside the scope of this study. Second, among

durable product categories, the target is still limited to such product categories that are publicly

consumed (i.e., those that are seen by others when the products are being used) (Bourne, 1957).

Symbolic or self-expressive benefits are usually related to underlying needs for personal

expression and outer-directed self-esteem (Keller, 1993). For this reason, privately consumed

categories (i.e., those that are not seen during the use or consumption with the possible

exception) (Bourne, 1957) are excluded from the scope of this research.

Although other possible limitations may be argued, this study does not impose further

constraints. As Aaker (1997) points out, while certain product categories tend to be served for

more self-expressive or symbolic use than others, there are differences in the extent to which a

specific brand is more or less self-expressive than other brands, even in the same self-

expressive product categories. For example in case of the automobile category, one person may
 6

ride a sport car brand to show off his coolness, where as another person may use a much cheaper

brand just to satisfy his living needs without caring how others would think of. One of the major

interests in this research is to explicate how such differences in self-expressive natures come

arise and affect the subsequent outcomes, such as emotional brand attachment, even in such

identical product categories. For this reason, although some "self-expressive brands," which are

considered to be salient in self-expressive or symbolic features, and their effects are the main

concern in the research, other less symbolic brands are included in the scope of study here.

Therefore, the focal brands are chosen based on their product categories and the scope is not

limited only to strong brands.

In sum, the scope in terms of the target brands in this study covers such brands that

belong to publicly consumed product categories that are more durable than fast-moving

consumer goods. The specific context that was used in the empirical test here is U.S. consumers

in general and their brands that can fit the scope. In this case, for example, the focal brands are

those included in such product categories that consumers usually bring to places where they

frequently visit and often use in front of others in such places. They may contain smart phones,

sport shoes, jeans, cars, tablets, e-books, and so on. On the other hand, such products as beers or

perfumes (i.e., fast-moving consumption goods) as well as game consoles or digital TV sets (i.e.,

privately consumed products) are outside the scope of the current study.

1.4 Potential Contributions

The most remarkable contribution in this research should be brought by its synthesis of

multiple research streams that have attracted significant research interests and have been

intensively studied especially for recent years in the field of brand. Through the synthesis, this

research makes an attempt to incorporate the factor of consumers experience into the study of
 7

brand attachment in a comprehensive way, while aiming to more clearly verify the elusive

effects of the self-congruity than ever, from the new theoretical perspective.

First, this research closely ties self-expansion theory to the brand attachment research by

offering a detailed explanation concerning the formation of emotional brand attachment through

self-expansion process. The significant interest in emotional brand attachment has been emerging

for these years (e.g., Malar et al., 2011; Park et al., 2010; Swaminathan, et al., 2009; Thomson, et

al., 2005). The majority of researchers have referred to or mentioned self-expansion theory

(Aaron and Aaron, 1986) as the central mechanism of the attachment formation, or at least part

of the explanation (Malar et al., 2011; Park et al., 2010; Fournier, 1998). However, little existing

research has provided explanations that explicitly describe the psychological process the theory

details. The current study extensively discusses the process and develops a systematic

explanation to describe how self-expansion leads to emotional attachment to brands by faithfully

applying the original theory.

Second, this is the first study that examines the influence of consumers comprehensive

experiences with brands on the formation of emotional brand attachment by applying a recently

developed concept by Brakus et al. (2009) to the brand attachment research. Since emotional

attachment develops over time, consumers past experiences with brands should play a crucial

role in the formation process. Nonetheless, not only do few studies refer to this factor, but also

those exceptions argue or examine solely usage experience (e.g., Fournier, 1998; Aaker et al.,

2004; Kressmann et al., 2006). Experience can be direct interactions with brands, such as usage

experience or physical contact, or indirect interactions, such as exposure to advertisements or

social influence (Brakus et al., 2009). Brakus et al.s (2009) brand experience is a comprehensive

concept that encompasses indirect as well as direct consumers experiences. By employing the
 8

concept first in the brand attachment research, the current study aims to explicate and empirically

examine the impact of consumers past experience on emotional brand attachment inclusively.

Third, this research is also the first attempt to establish the theory that explains how such

experiences are accumulated and determine their subsequent impacts. As mentioned above, the

current study employs the concept of brand experience to examine the impact of consumers past

experience. However, the literature in brand experience has not argued how the impact of

experience is determined. Meanwhile, the research streams in social psychology, such as goal-

directed perception (Janiszewski, 2008) or behavioral priming (Bargh et al., 1996) have recently

begun to intensively examine the psychological processes regarding how consumers interactions

with brands develop their responses to brand-related stimuli (e.g., Chartrand et al., 2008;

Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Ferraro et al., 2009). By taking advantage of this emerging stream and

merging it into the brand experience literature, the current study proposes the first theoretical

framework to explain the developmental process of the impacts of brand experience.

Finally and most importantly, on the basis of these integrations, this research examines

the effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment. The self-congruity effect has been

studied over five decades concerning various consumers outcomes, such as brand attitude, brand

preference, or purchase intention (e.g., Levi, 1959; Sirgy, 1982; Aaker, 1999). However, the

findings have been controversial for decades (Aaker, 1999). Recently, Malar et al. (2011) first

examined the effect of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment and the results were partly

inconclusive. Building on their study, this research aims to further delve into the traditional

research stream that has consistently captured substantial research interests from another

perspective. Thus, the main contribution of the current study is to demonstrate the effects of self-
 9

congruity clearly by synthesizing the recent achievements in various growing research streams

which are closely related yet to be integrated.

1.5 Outline of the Dissertation

This dissertation is organized into five chapters as follows. Chapter1 has described the

purpose of this research as well as the motivation. It has also introduced the research questions

that the dissertation intends to answer. Finally, it outlined the scope of the study and the potential

contributions. Also, the definitions of key concepts are presented in the Table 1.1 at the end of

this chapter.

Chapter 2 provides an overview of the extant literature on emotional brand attachment,

self-congruity, and brand experience. The theoretical models of this study are presented and

explained, first. Subsequently, the concept of emotional brand attachment is detailed. In the

following discussion of self-congruity, after self-concept and the concept of self-congruity are

described, the theories of self-motives are presented to explain how ideal as well as actual self-

congruity lead to an emotional attachment to brands. Following this, the concept of brand

experience is introduced and discussed in detail. Based on this conceptualization, the theory is

developed to explain the direct effects of brand experience as well as its interaction effects with

self-congruity on emotional brand attachment. Finally, the two outcomes of emotional brand

attachment, willingness to pay a brand premium and likelihood of positive word of mouth, and

the effects of emotional brand attachment on these outcomes are discussed. Research hypotheses

are also presented in this chapter.

Chapter 3 covers the research methodology for testing the models and the research

hypotheses. It outlines the research design and its rationale, especially in relation to the sample

characteristics and the focal brands. In addition, the chapter discusses operationalization of the
 10

constructs, assessment of reliability and validity, and statistical techniques used to analyze the

data.

Chapter 4 summarizes the data collection procedures and reports the details of statistical

analysis performed for the pretest and the main study. Specifically as to the main study, results of

hypothesis testing mainly based on structural equation modeling are presented. First, the

assessment of the measurement model for the constructs used in the subsequent hypothesis

testing is reported. Psychometric properties of these constructs are examined to test construct

reliability and validity as well as dimensionality here. Thereafter, results of the structural model

analysis to test the proposed hypotheses are detailed, along with the further examinations of the

interaction effects using analysis of variance.

Chapter 5 concludes the study by offering an overall summary of the dissertation and

discussions regarding the implications of the findings as well as their theoretical and practical

contributions. Also, the limitations of the study are argued and suggestions for future research

are discussed.

1.6 Key Conceptual Definitions

For ease of reference, key conceptual definitions are presented in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1
Key conceptual definitions

Concept Definition
Emotional Brand Attachment An emotion-laden target-specific bond between a person and a specific brand.
Emotional Brand Attachment consists of three dimensions:
Affection (warm feelings toward a brand);
Passion (intensely aroused positive feelings toward a brand); and
Connection (feelings of being joined to a brand).
(Thomson, McInnis, and Park, 2005)
Self-Concept The total set of beliefs about, and attitudes toward the self (Rosenberg, 1979)
In other words, self-concept is ones understanding of him or her-self, including personal
characteristics, values, goals, feelings, and images.
 11

Self-Schemata Cognitive generalizations about the self, derived from past experience, that organize and
guide the processing self-related information contained in the individuals social
experiences. Self-schemata are supposed to be a cognitive structure, and the self-concept is
a reflection of the system of the cognitive structure.
(Markus, 1977; Markus and Wurf, 1987)
Self-Representations Cognitive representations of the self that comprise the self-concept.
Self-representations are a reflection of self-schemata and the self-concept is composed of
(active) self-representations.
(Markus and Wurf, 1987)
Self-Image Self-representations that can be the subject of conscious reflection are
usually termed self-conceptions. Self-images are self-conceptions of a person's perceived
potential. Thus, a self-image represent each of possible selves, such as actual self-image,
ideal self-image, and so on.
(Markus and Nurius, 1986; Markus and Wurf, 1987)
Ideal Self-Image Ones self-image of the attributes they would like to possess. In other words, a self-image
of who I would like to be
(Higgins, 1978; Markus and Nurius, 1986)
Actual Self-Image Ones self-image of the attributes the individual believes they actually possess, that is a
self-image of who I am
(Higgins, 1978; Markus and Nurius, 1986)
Self-Congruity The match between a consumers self-image and the brand user image or brand personality
of a brand
(Kressman et al., 2006; Sirgy et al., 1997)
Ideal Self-Congruity Self-Congruity between ideal self-image and the brand user image or brand personality of a
brand
(Kressman et al., 2006; Sirgy et al., 1997)

Actual Self-Congruity Self-Congruity between actual self-image and the brand user image or brand personality of
a brand
(Kressman et al., 2006; Sirgy et al., 1997)

Brand Personality A set of human characteristics associated with a brand.

The concept consists of the five-factor personality structure: Sincerity (down-to-earth,
honest, wholesome, and cheerful); Excitement (daring, spirited, imaginative, and up to
date); Competence (reliable intelligent, and successful); Sophistication (upper class and
charming); and
Ruggedness (outdoorsy and tough).
(Aaker, 1997)
Self-Esteem a persons overall evaluation of his or her worthiness as a human being
(Rosenberg 1979)
Brand Experience Subjective, internal consumer responses (sensations, feelings, and cognitions) and
behavioral responses evoked by brand-related stimuli that are part of a brands design and
identity, packaging, communications, and environments.
The concept consists of four dimensions:
Sensory Experience (visual, auditory, tactile, gustative, and olfactory stimulations);
Affective Experience (a wide range of affective and emotional feelings);
Intellectual Experience (stimulations guiding a consumer to divergent and convergent
thinking); and
Behavioral Experience (behavioral responses such as bodily experience, lifestyle, and
active interaction with a brand).
(Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello, 2009; Zarantonello and Schmitt, 2010)
Willingness to Pay a Brand The extent to which a consumer is willing to pay a higher price for his/her preferred brand
over comparable/lesser brands in the same product category.
Premium (Netemeyer et al., 2004)
Positive Word of Mouth Informal, person-to-person communication between a perceived noncommercial
communicator and a receiver regarding a brand, a product, and organization, or a service
(especially in favor of them), such as making recommendations to others or extolling a
company's quality orientation, and so on.
(Brown et al., 2005; Harrison-Walker, 2001)
 12

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Overview

In this chapter, existing research on emotional brand attachment, self-congruity, and

brand experience are surveyed. First, the concept of emotional brand attachment is summarized.

Next, after the concepts of self and self-congruity are reviewed, how self motives affect the

development of emotional states, including attachment, is explained. Starting with Sirgys (1986)

self-congruity theory, self-enhancement theory (Rogers, 1961; Shrauger, 1975) and self-

verification theory (Swann, 1983; Swann et al., 1992) are developed in order to explain the

processes. Following that, the concept of brand experience is presented, and the effects of

interaction between brand experience and self-congruity are examined, by employing self-

expansion theory (Aron and Aron1986). Also, as outcomes of emotional brand attachment, the

concepts of willingness to pay a brand premium and positive word of mouth are briefly reviewed.

Finally, on the basis of this literature review, the hypotheses are developed for the present study.

The conceptual models used in this research are also outlined.

2.2 The Concept of Emotional Brand Attachment

Marketing research suggests that brand attachment is critical because it has been shown

to affect behaviors that result in brand profitability or customer lifetime value (Thomson,

McInnis, and Park, 2005). Furthermore, recent research suggests that brand attachment predicts

consumer attitudes or behaviors, such as purchase intentions, purchase behaviors, and brand

choices (Park et al., 2010). Reflecting this, research interest in this area has been rapidly growing
 13

especially since a reliable, empirically tested measure was developed by Thomson, McInnis, and

Park (2005).

2.2.1 Attachment

In psychology, attachment is defined as an emotion-laden target-specific bond between a

person and a specific object (Bowlby, 1979; Thomson, McInnis, and Park, 2005). From a

cognitive perspective, this bond can be represented by a rich and accessible memory network and

characterized by perceived ease and frequency with which the object-related thought and feeling

are brought to mind (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). However, consumer researchers as well as

social and personality psychology researchers have characterized attachment as extending ones

self-concept to or identifying oneself with an object (Belk, 1988; Aron et al., 1991; Kleine,

Kleine, and Karnan, 1993). That is, attachment as a bond implies ones categorizing the object as

part of self-concept and developing a sense of oneness (Park et al., 2010).

The resulting bond is an inherently emotional state, which is associated with strong

feeling, such as connection, affection, love, and passion, and especially distinguished by ones

willingness to maintain proximity to the object and separation distress when the object is lost

(Thomson, McInnis, and Park, 2005). In addition to emotional outcomes, behavioral

commitments, such as care-giving or financial investment, also accompany attachment to an

object (Aron et al., 1991). Thus, attachment can be understood as a strong emotional state

accompanied by hot affects (Park et al., 2010; Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007), resulting from

extension of the self-concept to others or objects and including them in the self (Aron and Aron,

1986).
 14

2.2.2 Emotional Brand Attachment

Although attachment to a brand might be interpreted as an attachment to a specific

tangible object with a brand, the concept can also encompass broader meanings. For example,

Grisaffe and Nguyen (2011) point out that branded items are mass produced and therefore an

attachment to a brand may not be the same as an attachment to a specific possession. Indeed, a

brand itself is not objective existence but a collection of perceptions stored in the memory of

consumer (Fournier, 1998; Keller, 1993). With regard to this, brand research has assumed brand

user image or personality-like characteristics in brands (i.e., brand personality). Based on this

notion, self-congruity research has postulated that brand user image or brand personality that a

product reflects is a point of reference with which a consumer compares his or her self-image

and a focus with which a consumer identifies his/her-self (Kressmann et al., 2006; Aaker, 1997;

1999). Similarly, as to brand attachment, research has posited that consumers attach to such

characteristics (e.g., Aaker, Fournier, and Brasel, 2004; Swaminathan, Stilley, and Ahluwania,

2009). Thus, research suggests that the targets of attachment can be such abstract concepts as

brand user image or brand personality.

Thomson, McInnis, and Park (2005) applied the concept of attachment to brand research,

developing the first empirically tested scale to measure strength of attachment to a brand. They

refer to the concept as emotional brand attachment. In the scale development process, the

concept was found to consist of the three components labeled affection, passion, and

connection. The first factor, affection represents the warm feelings a consumer holds toward

a brand and the scale includes such items as affectionate, loved, friendly, and peaceful,

supposedly. The second factor, passion reflects intensely aroused positive feelings toward a

brand, composed of such items as passionate, delighted, and captivated. The third factor
 15

connection denotes a consumers feelings of being joined to the brand, including such items as

connected, bonded, and attached. In sum, the research confirms that emotional brand attachment

also closely relates to proximity maintenance (i.e., a commitment to preserving relationship with

a brand) as well as separation distress (i.e., a perception that a brand is irreplaceable or

psychological distress resulting from real or threatened separation from the brand) and leads to

such outcomes as brand loyalty and willingness to pay a price premium, which imply the ensuing

behavioral commitments.

Thomson, McInnis, and Park (2005) and Park et al. (2010) also argue the distinction

between emotional brand attachment and brand attitude. First, strong brand attachments develop

over time, while positive strong attitudes may not be so time dependent. Such attitudes are based

on thoughtful processing and can be formed in a rather limited time. On the other hand,

attachments are attended by rich sets of accessible memory networks or schemas that can lead to

affectively-laden linkage of the self to a brand, which can reflect a more advanced stage of

relationship development. Next, attachments are the subjective sense of self-brand relationship,

whereas attitudes are objective indicators of attitude accessibility. Attachment strength is

indicated by the connection between the self and the brand and varies depending upon the

prominence of brand thought in a consumer self-concept. In contrast, attitudes do not necessarily

link the brand to the self-concept. Rather, attitude strength is indicated as a function of the

confidence with which the attitude is held. The difference is well illustrated by such specific

behaviors as proximity maintenance and separation distress displayed by individuals who are

emotionally attached to a brand. Finally, these two constructs are different in their range of

valence. Attachments vary in strength from weak to strong, although strong attitudes can range

from positive to negative. Through their empirical examination, Thomson, McInnis, and Park
 16

(2005) find that emotional brand attachment is distinct from brand attitude construct, and also

different from other closely related marketing constructs, such as satisfaction and involvement.

Furthermore, Park et al. (2010) demonstrate that attachment construct can predict behavioral

outcome variables such as purchase intention, actual purchase behavior, or brand purchase share.

The foregoing discussion can be summed up by saying that emotional brand attachment

is a distinct concept, characterized by the emotion-laden brand-self relationship resulting from

extension of self-concept to a brand and inclusion of the brands concept in the self. Accordingly,

and in general, the stronger the brand-self connection is, the stronger the attachment becomes.

This suggests the question of what facilitates the extension of the self-concept. The marketing

literature suggests that brand-self relations are developed by self motives (Malar et al., 2011;

Park et al., 2010; Sirgy, 1986). A recent comprehensive review in psychology, regarding the

links between self-motives and emotions, concludes that self-motives which lead to emotional

states can be integrated into the following: self-expansion motive, self-enhancement motive, and

self-verification motive (Leary, 2007). In the following sections, the attachment development

processes in relation to such self-motives will be discussed.

2.3 Self-Congruity

For decades, it has been assumed that consumers purchase certain products or brands as a

means of expressing themselves (e.g., Levi, 1959; Evans, 1959). On some occasions, consumers

may buy such brands to make them more attractive and to realize their aspired states (Landon,

1974). At other times, they may search for brands that suit with who they actually are, seeking

some comfort (Landon, 1974; Dolich, 1969). In either case, what matters is the fit or congruity

between self-images (i.e., what I would like to be or what I am) and brand images. This fit is

referred to as self-congruity and is used to theoretically explain as well as to empirically

 17

examine such phenomenon (e.g., Sirgy, 1982; Aaker, 1999). In this section, self-congruity and

the effects on emotional brand attachment are discussed. The discussion begins with a review of

self-concept, in which self-congruity perception as well as emotional attachment is represented.

Following that, the concept of self-congruity is clarified. Finally, how self-motives relate to self-

congruity and lead to the emotional attachment is argued.

2.3.1 The Concept of The Self

Self-concept is defined as the total set of beliefs about, and attitudes toward the self

(Rosenberg, 1979). That is, self-concept is an individuals understanding of themselves,

including personal characteristics, values, goals, feelings, and images. People develop such

understandings by making inferences from their own actions, internal arousal reactions,

cognitions, emotions, and motivations as well as through direct self assessment, social

comparison, or direct interaction with others (Markus and Wurf, 1987). Similar to other

conceptual knowledge, self-concept consists of a cognitive schema, called self-schema, in which

cognitive generalizations about the self, derived from past experience, organize and guide

the processing of self-related information contained in the individuals social experiences

(Markus, 1977, p.64).

In a comprehensive review of self-concept research, Markus and Wurf (1987) point out

that the self-schema is multi-dimensional, multifaceted structure, and accordingly, that, as a

reflection of such a self-schema, self-concept is comprised of multifaceted self-representations.

In such self-concept, self-representations differ in their centrality or importance. For example,

some representations, such as chronic personality traits (e.g., Big Five factors; Digman, 1990),

are central to self-concept and consistent, while others are peripheral and more adaptive to

environmental change. Self-representations can also be affectively charged. Some are positive
 18

(e.g., smart, active, or diligent), whereas others are negative (e.g., shy, lazy, or fat). Finally, the

representations also differ in regard to whether they reflect who the person actually is or who

they would like to be. Some are actual-selves and others are hoped-for ideals. For example, a

person may perceive herself as a modest and retiring person, while she wants to be cheerful and

active.

Not all self-representations are active at the same time. Indeed, self-representations and

the corresponding self-schemata become activated depending upon ones social roles at the time

or particular situations (Aaker, 1999; Sirgy, 1986). For example, a person may be very attentive

to how much they look professional and sophisticated at workplace shortly after beginning

working career, whereas they used to care much more about how creative and energetic they

appeared when students on campus. These activated schemata function as selection mechanisms

which determine whether information is attended to and how it is processed, and as a result, the

self-schemata become resistant to inconsistent or contradictory information, along with the

repeated experience (Markus, 1977). Accordingly, as a self-representation in ones self-concept

becomes more central or more salient, it becomes more likely to affect or even to regulate the

persons cognitive, emotional, or behavioral responses.

Among the various types of self-representations, consumer researchers have especially

focused on two: actual self-image; and ideal self-image, because they have assumed that these

representations are concerned with brand choice as a means of self-expression. Actual self-image

refers to the attributes the individual believes they actually possess, that is, who I am?, whereas

ideal self-image refers to the attributes they would like to possess, that is, who I would like to

be? (Higgins, 1987; Markus and Nurius, 1986). Researchers have assumed that the fit

between such self-representations and brands influences consumers preferences for brands or
 19

other behavioral outcomes, and have studied relationships by conceptualizing the fit as self-

brand image congruity or self-congruity (e.g., Evans,1959; Dolich, 1969; Landon, 1974).

2.3.2 Self-Congruity

Since Levi (1959) argued that consumer behavior is often influenced by symbolic aspects

of products rather than solely by functional attributes, consumer researchers have attempted to

verify this conjecture, assuming that self-congruity is the key driver of consumers preferences

for brands in self-expressive product categories. In this context, the concept of self-congruity is

essentially concerned with the symbolic features or images of a brand, in terms of the match

between the consumers self-image and the user image or brand personality of a brand

(Kressman et al., 2006; Sirgy et al., 1997).

In this context, self-image has referred to either actual self-image, ideal self-image, or

both, in the majority of self-congruity research (see Sirgy, 1982, for review). As discussed above,

such self-images are sub-parts of the self-representations reflecting ones self-schema, partly

evoked by the specific social role or the situational cues. Brand-user image refers to the

stereotypic image of the typical user of a brand (Kressmann et al., 2006). However, a brand itself

has also been assumed to have its own image of personality-like characteristics (Johar and Sirgy,

1991). In actuality, a brands image is not necessarily limited to the brand user image. For

example, the brand spokesperson (e.g., Michael Jordan), the product design (e.g., i-Mac), the

charismatic entrepreneur (e.g., Steve Jobs), and so on, often form and evoke a strong human

personality-like image associated with the brand, which have been referred to as brand

personality (e.g., Aaker, 1997).

With regard to the concept of self-congruity, it has been postulated that self-image and

brand personality (or brand-user image) have some common image categories or dimensions
 20

related to the brand and its values (Sirgy, 1986). Accordingly, self-congruity conceptually

signifies ones perception regarding the extent to which these two images are close to each other

(match), resulting from a comparison of the values in each image dimension. The closer self-

image and brand personality are, the higher self-congruity is, and vice versa (Sirgy, 1985). In this

context, congruity between ideal self-image and brand personality is defined as ideal self-

congruity, while congruity between actual self-image and brand personality refers to actual self-

congruity (Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy et al., 1997).

To clarify the concept of self-congruity, some properties of the scales for the construct

need to be discussed. As mentioned above, the concept assumes the image categories or

dimensions related to a brand and the values. Traditionally, the image dimensions were elicited

as a function of the product used, while the exception of a few studies used a standard set of

image dimensions (Sirgy et al., 1997). However, the elicited dimensions not only contained

irrelevant dimensions depending on the different brands, but also were not typically

generalizable to other product category contexts (Sirgy et al., 1997). On the other hand, the

standard set of image dimensions were not developed specifically for consumer research (Aaker,

1997). Furthermore, these scales simply add each dimension assuming a compensatory decision

rule, which may not always be the case (Sirgy et al., 1997).

Two different solutions have been proposed to resolve the problems. First, Sirgy et al.

(1997) created a global scale, measuring self-congruity as a general perception without

specifying any image dimensions. This scale indicates overall perceptions of self-congruity

without the problems associated with adding multiple dimensions (although it does not allow

researchers to profile and compare images among competing brands). Second, Aaker (1997)

develops the brand personality scale. This scale consists of the five dimensions that can be
 21

applied across various product categories, while still assuming the compensatory decision rule

when each dimension is added to calculate overall perception of self-congruity. Recent studies

use either of these measures or both (e.g., Kressmann et al., 2006; Kim et al., 2005). In this

dissertation, these two scales are used to take advantage of each merit. The global scale is used to

test the hypothesized relations between overall perceptions of self-congruity and other constructs,

whereas the brand personality scale is used to facilitate respondents to clearly recall and describe

brand personality in order to enhance the quality of responses to the global scale. Accordingly,

the five dimensions of Aakers brand personality scale are considered a part of self-congruity

concept here. Therefore, the dimensions are briefly reviewed below.

The Five Dimensions of Aakers Brand Personality. Aaker (1997) defined brand

personality as a set of human characteristics associated with a brand. The author developed a set

of trait scales for measuring distinct dimensions of brand personality. The Brand Personality

Scale (BPS) is constructed on the basis of the five factor model of the human personality traits

(i.e., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience, neuroticism)

(Digman, 1990). Aaker found a robust five-factor structure of the brand personality concept

which applies across brands based on the development process using 60 brands from various

product categories: sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, and ruggedness.

The sincerity dimension captures the idea of a warm and accepting brand personality

represented by four facets: down-to-earth, honest, wholesome, and cheerful. Excitement was

characterized as sociable, energetic, and active brand personality, also represented by four facets:

daring, spirited, imaginative, and up to date. Competence was characterized in terms of

responsible, dependable, and secure, represented by three facets: reliable, intelligent, and
 22

successful. Finally, sophistication was represented by two facets: upper class and charming

and the Ruggedness dimension is also represented by two facets: outdoorsy and tough.

Thus, the concept of self-congruity was reviewed. On the basis of this conceptualization,

consumer researchers have argued that self-congruity affects consumers cognitive, affective,

and behavioral outcomes. That is, the higher the self-congruity between self-image and a brand,

the more the likelihood of favorable outcomes to the brand (e.g., Evans, 1959; Dolich, 1969;

Landon, 1974). Among these studies, Sirgys (1986) self-congruity theory explicitly refers to the

mediation process of self-motives. In the theory, it is posited that ideal self-congruity is mediated

by the self-motive to enhance ones self-esteem, while actual self-congruity is mediated by the

self-motive to maintain the self consistent. That is, for ideal self-congruity, a consumer is

motivated to enhance his or her (actual) self-image toward the ideal self-image and prefers a

brand with a high ideal self-congruity to help improve the consumers self-image. On the other

hand, for actual self-congruity, a consumer is also motivated to be consistent in his or her actual

self-image, so seeks a brand balanced with such image. Thus, both ideal self-image and actual

self-image facilitate positive consumer responses, but are led by different self-motives.

2.3.3 Self-Congruity and Emotional Brand Attachment

Not limited to the self-congruity research stream, brand researchers have employed self

expansion theory (Aron and Aron, 1986; Aron, Aron, and Norman, 2001; Aron et al., 2005) to

explain how an attachment to a brand develops (e.g., Fournier, 1998; Kressmann et al., 2006;

Park et al., 2010; Malar et al., 2011). Self expansion theory is concerned with the formation of an

attachment to others in general, including persons, objects, and so on. The theory posits that

people have an essential motivation to expand the self-concept in the sense that they seek to

improve their potential efficacy (i.e., self-expansion motive). This motive drives people to
 23

increase the physical and social resources, perspectives, and identities that facilitate any goal that

might arise, by fostering relationships with others that have such elements. In terms of the self-

concept, this implies including concepts of others in the self. For example, a person who is newly

rich, but does not have the right social background may feel as if he attained a higher social

status solely because he bought a prestigious car or a piece of sophisticated furniture (cf. Holt,

1998; Henry, 2005). The expansion of the self-concept itself evokes a strong positive arousal,

supposedly, due to the expected increase in self-efficacy. This positive affect is, in turn,

associated with the partners or target objects, which eventually turns to be an emotional

attachment to them (Aron, Aron, and Norman, 2001).

In the current context, it may seem that an attachment is attained solely by extending the

self-image through possessing a brand, as Belk (1988) suggests. However, according to Aron,

Aron, and Norman (2001), an emotional attachment is formed even in an unreciprocated love

when high level of desirability in the possible relationship exists. This corresponds with the long

supposed phenomenon that people purchase a brand because of their aspiration for the brand

image or brand personality (Sirgy, 1982). Further, they suggest that, in addition to expanding the

self-concept, an emotional attachment is reinforced by supporting or maintaining important parts

of the self, which could explain why people try to maintain proximity in an attached relation and

experience separation distress when the relation collapsed. In brand-related contexts, this is

clearly illustrated by Fourniers (1998) finding that consumers develop an emotional attachment

to such brands that consistently affirm their core self-identity. Thus, self-expansion theory is

assumed applicable to the formation of an emotional brand attachment in general.

As discussed above, self expansion theory postulates that the self expansion motive leads

to emotional attachment in general contexts. Meanwhile, as to the current context, research

 24

suggests that other different self-motives take part in the individual processes depending on the

self-congruity that facilitates the processes. For example, Sirgys (1986) self-congruity theory

specifically posits that ideal self-congruity is mediated by the self-motive to enhance ones self-

esteem, while actual self-congruity is mediated by the self-motive to maintain the self consistent,

as discussed above. With regard to this, although self-congruity theory has not previously been

explicitly related to emotional attachment, Malar et al., (2011) recently develop a theoretical

explanation that may partly fill the gap based on the framework consistent with Sirgys. They

propose that ideal self-congruity is mediated by self-enhancement motive, whereas actual self-

congruity is mediated by self-verification motive, and that these self-congruities may support the

formation of an emotional brand attachment through these self-motives. On the basis of this

argument, a more detailed explanation is developed in the following sections.

2.3.3.1 Ideal Self-Congruity and Self-Enhancement

Self-enhancement theory (Rogers, 1961; Shrauger, 1975) posits that people are motivated

to approach desired reference values and avoid undesired reference values (i.e., self-

enhancement motives). In the self-congruity research, ideal self-image represents one of desired

values referred to in the theory. According to Higgins (1987), people recognize the discrepancy

between ideal self-image and actual self-image, which subsequently creates emotional states.

Such emotional states are assumed to motivate the person to resolve the discrepancy by

enhancing the self-esteem or the perception of actual self-image in some way (Markus and Wurf,

1987). All individuals experience a strong desire to enhance their self-esteem or perceived actual

self-image (Brown, Collins, and Schmidt, 1988). In such cases, ideal self-congruity is considered

to positively affect the subsequent consumer responses by facilitating such self-enhancement

processes, while the psychological processes may vary to some extent depending on the level of
 25

self-esteem or the extent of the discrepancy between actual self-image and ideal self-image, as

detailed below.

For individuals whose chronic self-esteem is high (and accordingly whose degree of

discrepancy between actual and ideal self-images tends to be low), ideal self-image as a point of

reference is perceived as a goal so the discrepancy between actual self-image and ideal self-

image tends to evoke a positive emotion (Boldero and Francis, 2002). Meanwhile, the

discrepancy tends to be smaller than those with low self-esteem, so the motivation is relatively

weak (Swann, et al., 1987). In addition, these individuals are apt to believe that such goals are

attainable, so they are more likely to engage in directly pursuing the goals, rather than relying on

such indirect ways as purchasing a brand to improve their self-images (Brown, Collins, and

Schmidt, 1988). Accordingly, such effects of brands with ideal self-congruity tend to be

substantially weak for those with high self-esteem. However, self-enhancement motives still

likely direct such individuals to brands congruent with their ideal self-image due to positive

emotions associated with a goal (i.e., aspirations).

By contrast, individuals whose chronic self-esteem is low (and accordingly whose degree

of discrepancy between actual and ideal self-images tends to be high) are assumed to choose

different ways for self-enhancement. They are more likely to distort and bias personal

information in a self-enhancing direction (Brown, Collins, and Schmidt, 1988). Such individuals

tend to perceive ideal self-image not only as a goal, but also as a standard to be fulfilled, mostly

through social comparison (Boldero and Francis, 2002). So, the discrepancy between ideal self-

image and actual self-image sometimes evoke negative emotions, leaving themselves to

uncomfortable states (Carver and Scheier, 1981; Higgins, 1987). They are also more susceptible

to such negative emotions, the lower the self-esteem is (Higgins, 1987). Besides, the discrepancy
 26

tends to be substantially large in comparison with those with high self-esteem (Swann et al.,

1987). Accordingly, they are considerably more motivated to reduce the discrepancy than those

with high self-esteem (Swann et al., 1987). However, due to the lack of confidence, such

individuals doubt their competence and consider that the desired states are not easily attainable in

direct ways (i.e., engaging in pursuing for the goals). As a result, they are prone to choose more

indirect ways to enhance their perceived self-image rather than direct ways (Brown, Collins, and

Schmidt, 1988).

For such individuals, a common way of self-enhancement is downward self-enhancement

(Collins, 1996). This type of self-enhancement is more often observed in such cases that their

self-concept is threatened and known by its typical forms such as self-serving or self-

handicapping (Markus and Wurf, 1987). In downward self-enhancement, people change their

focuses of interpretation to some personally relevant matters or features that they consider the

most important or are best at, and underestimate or ignore other characteristics as irrelevant, so

that they can protect their self-image from a direct comparison with others (I may not be smart,

but I am nice.) (Tesser, 1986).

On the other hand, such people also tend to engage in upward self-enhancement. In

upward self-enhancement, individuals compare themselves with others who are superior and

assimilate themselves with the superior individuals by featuring the similarity or community

(Collins, 1996). By doing so, individuals sometimes associate themselves with those superior in

the self-relevant domains and bolster their self-image in these domains (Markus and Wurf, 1987;

Brown, Collins, and Schmidt, 1988). For example, such individuals sometimes bask in the

reflected glory of others achievements by highlighting their association with them (Cialdini et

al., 1976). In addition, Wicklund and Gollwitzer (1982) found that people who are concerned
 27

with unachieved self-relevant goals (therefore, concerned with the low self-esteem) are more

likely to display visible symbols to achieve desired self-images rather than admitting mistakes

made by committing actual behavior. In the current context, it is likely that brands take important

roles in achieving this upward self-enhancement process and the contribution depends on the

extent of ideal self-congruity.

Thus, brands congruent with ones ideal self-image evoke positive emotions, although the

process may be different depending on the level of self-esteem or the extent of the discrepancy

between actual self-image and ideal self-image. By associating themselves with such brands and

experiencing the positive arousal repeatedly, consumers are expected to more clearly focus on

the brands and more closely relate the brands to their self-image, which will gradually lead to an

emotional attachment to the brands.

This discussion can be summarized in the following hypothesis.

- H1: Ideal self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand

attachment.

That is, the higher the ideal self-congruity of a brand, the higher the emotional

brand attachment to the brand.

2.3.3.2 Actual Self-Congruity and Self-Verification

Self-verification theory diverges from self-consistency theory (Lecky, 1945; Epstein,

1985) used in Sirgys self-congruity theory. Self-consistency theory contends that people engage

in cognitive and behavioral activities that perpetuate their self-concept in striving for consistency

itself (Swann et al., 1987). In the current context, this implies that people tend to prefer brands

congruent with their actual self-images, as Sirgy (1986) proposed. Although self-verification

theory also postulates that people seek to maintain the consistency, it is also proposed that they
 28

are motivated to confirm their self-concept to bolster their perceptions of prediction and control

(i.e., self-verification motives; Swann, Stein-Seroussi, and Giesler, 1992). By applying the theory

to emotional brand attachment research, Malar et al. (2011) argue that consumers are motivated

to search for experiences that affirm their self-concept and one way for them to satisfy the

motive is to consume a brand with a personality that is congruent with the actual self. They

maintain that doing so results in positive reinforcement and leads to positive feelings about the

brand, which turns to greater emotional brand attachment.

As discussed regarding ideal self-congruity, also in the relation between actual self-

congruity and emotional brand attachment, the nature of self-verification processes can vary

depending on the level of self-esteem, or the extent of discrepancy between actual self-image and

ideal self-image. Individuals whose chronic self-esteem is low, in fact, seek such information

which cognitively verifies actual self-image even when negative feedback occurs (Swann et al.,

1987). By doing so, they try to dissolve inherent anxiety about the epistemic consideration (they

want to be reassured by a partner who would confirm their self-view) and pragmatic

consideration (they want to have a smooth, harmonious interaction with a self-verifying partner)

(Swann, Stein-Seroussi, and Giesler, 1992). In addition to getting the relief, such self-verifying

interactions evoke such warm feeling that the partner has empathy (i.e., feeling spontaneously

what others feel) to them, which facilitates including the partner in the self-concept (the partners

feeling are my feelings) (Aron, Aron, and Norman, 2001). Meanwhile, because they tend to have

a negative self-view, they are also prone to receive certain (in comparison with self-enhancement

information) and negative emotions from such self-verification information (Swann et al., 1987).

Thus, for those with low self-esteem, partners or brands congruent with actual self-image are

likely to lead to somewhat ambivalent emotional states. However, such individuals still likely
 29

direct themselves to such brands, seeking to satisfy their self-verification motives through

psychological benefits mentioned above.

On the other hand, people whose chronic self-esteem is high are more likely motivated to

maintain or confirm their self-images and obtain positive emotions simultaneously from the same

self-verification process than those with low self-esteem (Swann et al., 1987). As discussed

above, such individuals tend to engage in direct pursuit of goals rather than indirect ways such as

self-enhancement. However, brands still have considerable impact on emotional attachment for

such consumers. Brands congruent with their actual self-image evoke what they have attained or

what they are good at, and help them verify their important self-identity, consistently sustaining

and affirming the actual self-image in certain and positive ways (Fournier, 1998). Such certain

feelings and positive emotions can be repeatedly reinforced by the brand stimuli, making them

feel that such brands are part of their identity (Fournier, 1998). Therefore, it is likely that this

self-verification process will ultimately form a strong emotional attachment to the brands and the

contribution depends on the extent of actual self-congruity.

Thus, brands congruent with ones actual self-image provide psychological benefits or

positive emotions, such as reliefs, comfort, or self-affirmation, although their nature and intensity

may be different depending on the level of self-esteem. By associating themselves with such

brands and experiencing such positive psychological states repeatedly, consumers are expected

to be more clearly aware of the brands and more closely connect the brands to their self-image,

which will gradually lead to an emotional attachment to the brands.

This discussion can be summarized in the following hypothesis.

- H2: Actual self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand

attachment.
 30

That is, the higher the actual self-congruity of a brand, the higher the emotional

brand attachment to the brand.

2.4 Brand Experience

As discussed above, an emotional brand attachment develops over time. That is, a brand

has to be interacted with or be experienced by the consumer before they become attached to it

(Thomson, McInnis, and Park, 2005). However, little research in brand attachment has

considered the effect of such experience. An empirical study conducted by Aaker and colleagues

(Aaker, Fournier, and Brasel, 2004) may be an exception, but they mainly followed the

respondents temporal changes of an emotional attachment and did not examine the differential

effect of experiences on the attachment. Grisaffe and Nguyens (2011) qualitative study

identified the potential effects of consumer-brand interactions. Nevertheless, they did not

quantify the impact of such brand experiences. Most studies seem to have ignored this factor.

Thus, no existing study has yet examined how brand experience systematically affects emotional

brand attachment, although experience is purported to be an essential determinant of brand

attachment. Similarly, the self-congruity research has not incorporated the effect of brand

experience in the models, although some studies focused on such products that the respondents

actually own and use (e.g., Kressmann et al., 2006).

In the following sections, the impact of brand experience on the resultant brand

attachment will be explored by employing the concept and measure of brand experience, recently

developed by Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello (2009). First, the concept of brand experience

will be introduced. Then, its main effect on emotional brand attachment will be discussed.

Finally, the interaction effects with self-congruity on brand attachment will be examined.
 31

2.4.1 The Concept of Brand Experience

Experiencing a brand does not necessarily imply any usage experience of the brand. A

brand can be experienced indirectly (i.e., virtually presented brand stimuli such as symbol, logo,

slogan, packages, product ads, etc.), as well as directly (i.e., physical contact with the product or

the consumption experience) (Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello, 2009). Furthermore, a longer

usage or repeated purchases do not always mean greater experiences. For example, a frequent

purchase may simply reflect the consumers inertia rather than a deep relationship (Fournier,

1998). Conversely, a consumer may yearn toward a good without expecting a chance to buy, as

described in O Henrys well known short story, The Gift of the Magi. Thus, conceptualizing

brand experience and operationalizing its strength or intensity, which should represent the

proportional impact of brand experience on the subsequent outcomes, cannot simply be related to

such familiar concepts as usage experience or purchase frequency.

Recently, Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello (2009) developed a comprehensive concept

and scale of brand experience. They define brand experience as subjective, internal

consumer responses (sensations, feelings, and cognitions) and behavioral responses evoked by

brand-related stimuli that are part of a brands design and identity, packaging, communications,

and environments (p.53). Here, brand experience is supposed to vary in strength and intensity,

as implied above. According to this definition, psychological and behavioral responses (to

brand-related stimuli mentioned above) themselves are referred to as brand experience.

However, the intensity of such responses intrinsically reflects direct and indirect interactions (the

authors also refer to them as experience) prior to an exposure to specific brand stimuli, rather

than the physical configuration or narrative contents of the stimuli (Schmitt, 2009; Brakus et al.,

2009; Phillips and McQuarrie, 2010). Such interactions as experience can include direct
 32

encounters with the product (e.g., consumption or physical contact), contacts with marketing

communication tools (e.g., TV advertisings, press release, websites, sales promotion, or events),

and social influences (e.g., word of mouth or observing others who are using the product) (cf.

Brakus et al., 2009; Schumitt, 2009; Schultz, 2007; Chattopadyay and Laborie, 2005; Whelan

and Wohlfeil, 2006; Ha and Perk, 2005). Through such interactions, a consumer develops

holistic impression of a brand in the memory, and, the concept of brand experience is supposed

to mainly reflect such impression (Iglesias, Sigh, and Batista-Foguet, 2011).

In sum, psychological responses as brand experience are essentially reflection of the

information accumulated through past interactions or experiences with the brand, and the brand-

related stimuli function as the trigger of such responses. Accordingly, the intensity represents the

magnitude of psychological impact of a consumers experiences concerning a brand as a whole.

Thus, Brakus et al.s (2009) conceptualize brand experience as the responses evoked by brand-

related stimuli, enabling researchers to measure the impact of general experiences related to a

brand, regardless of whether they are direct or indirect experiences, and do so independently of

the mere duration of such experiences.

Brakus et al.s (2009) concept and scale identifies four dimensions of brand experience,

each of which represents a different facet of internal or behavioral response (Brakus et al., 2009;

Zarantonello and Schmitt, 2010). The first dimension is sensory experience, which refers to the

visual, auditory, tactile, gustative, and olfactory stimulations provided by a brand. The scale

items are designed to capture the overall level of the intensity of responses related to aesthetics

or sensory perceptions in general. The second dimension is affective experience, which refers

to a wide range of emotional feelings, such as fun, refreshed, inspired, or nostalgia. The scale

items are designed to reflect the overall level of the intensity of affective or emotional reactions
 33

that the stimuli arouse, regardless of its specific nature of the reactions. The third dimension is

intellectual experience, which refers to such responses that stimulate or motivate analytical and

imaginative thoughts. These scale items are designed to capture the overall level of stimulative

responses that make an individual engage in convergent and divergent thinking. The fourth

dimension behavioral experience, reflects behavioral responses relating to bodily experiences,

lifestyles aspects, and active interactions with the brand. These scale items are designed to

measure the overall subjective degree to which an individual is likely to associate themselves

with engaging in such activities with the brand.

On the basis of this conceptualization, Barkus and colleagues create a second order

construct of brand experience, consisting of the above four dimensions. The measure is

composed of twelve items, with three items for each dimension. The construct and scale is

developed to capture the strength and intensity of positive responses in each of the four

dimensions in order to quantify the overall strength of such responses in terms of brand

experience. More specifically, the scale is designed to assess "a lasting trace stored in long-term

memory based on multiple exposures to brand related stimuli" (p. 55), as the source of such

responses. Accordingly, the four dimensions are supposed to capture multiple facets of the

overall brand experience as reflections of "a lasting trace stored in long-term memory" that was

formed and accumulated through past interactions with the brand. With regard to its effects,

research suggests that the stronger or more intense an individuals overall brand experience, the

more it is likely to predict positive outcomes for the brand (Phillips and McQuarrie, 2010).

Brakus and the colleagues also examined the discriminant validity of the brand

experience scale in relation to other evaluative, motivational, and affective brand-related

constructs. These constructs include brand attachment as well as brand attitude, brand
 34

involvement, consumer delight, and the results support the discriminant validity of brand

experience from the other constructs.

Thus far, the concept of brand experience has been examined based on the existing

literature. In the review, it was suggested that the construct and scale enables researchers to

measure an individuals overall experience of a brand regardless of the natures and durations of

prior experiences. Also, it was shown that a more intense brand experience is more likely to

predict positive outcomes for the brand. In the following section, the effects of brand experience

on emotional brand attachment as well as those on the previously hypothesized relations

regarding self-congruity and self-esteem are examined. Finally, the hypotheses as to the possible

relationships are proposed.

2.4.2 Brand Experience and Self-Expansion

As discussed above, a brand experience is psychological and behavioral responses

evoked by brand stimuli which reflect past interactions with the brand. Research in social

psychology and consumer behavior suggests how such responses develop through those past

interactions with a brand (e.g., Ferraro et al., 2009; Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Janiszewski, 2008;

Custers and Aarts, 2005; Bargh et al., 1996). According to this research stream, each interaction

can be considered such a process that a brand or the related stimuli function as cues, activating

mental representations associated with the brand, which, in turn, elicit psychological or

behavioral responses (Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Sela and Shiv, 2009). Based on this notion,

research postulates that the accumulation of past interactions creates the perceptual variance to

the cues among consumers and influences their psychological and behavioral responses (i.e.,

brand experience) at a certain point of time, affecting the consumers relationship with brands

(Janiszewski, 2008; Fournier, 1998).

 35

At the early stage of the development of such processes (Figure 2.1), for example, when a

new brand is introduced into the target market, the cues are usually consciously (or possibly

unconsciously) processed and associated with the mental representations, such as traits,

stereotypes, or goals, that can be related to the brand (Bargh and Chartrand, 1999; Bargh et al.,

1996, Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Ferraro et al., 2009; Sela and Shiv, 2009). Through repeated and

consistent activation of such representations, those mental representations become more strongly

linked to representations of the cues (in this context, brand representations) in memory and

become chronically more accessible from such cues (Chartrand and Bargh, 1996; Bargh et al.,

1996; Custer and Aarts, 2005; Gillath et al., 2006). As the accessibility increases and becomes

stronger, the mental processes tend to be more automatic (i.e., spreading activation) (Fitzsimons

et al., 2008; Bargh et al., 2001; Gillath et al., 2006; Bargh and Chartrand, 1999). In this

developmental process, all of the possible sources of such activation can enhance the

accessibility strength in an accumulative fashion (Bargh et al., 1996). Concerning this, research

found that, whatever the cues may be, either explicitly or implicitly related to the brand (e.g.,

priming stimuli), or even either subliminal or supraliminal stimuli, they can activate those mental

representations, suggesting that, potentially, any kind of interactions with or exposures to the

brand-related information can contribute to the strength of accessibility (Chartrand, 2005; Bargh

and Chartrand, 1999; Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Shah, 2003; Janiszewski and van Osselaer, 2005;

Dijksterhuis and Smith, 2005).

Among the mental representations activated by such cues, goal representations are

supposed to play a central role in creating those responses (Chartrand and Bargh, 1996; Custers

and Aarts, 2005; Bargh et al., 2001; Chartrand et al., 2008; Shah, 2003; Fitzsimons et al., 2008).

In memory, goals are represented as some desired states that individuals want to attain or to
 36

Mental Representation
Direct/Indirect Interaction (Traits, Stereotypes, etc)
MR R
with a brand

Brand / Positive
B
Stimuli GR Affect R
R
as Cues
MR Goal Representation
R
Brand Representation Mental Representation
(Traits, Stereotypes, etc) Psychological or Behavioral
Responses

Spreading Activation

R
MR

Brand / Positive
B
Stimuli GR Affect R
R
as Cues
MR
R

Schematic Mental Structure

Environmental Cues (other
than brand-related stimuli)
Psychological/Behavioral Responses
to Brand/Stimuli
(i.e., Brand Experience)
EC

MR
R

Brand / Positive
B
Stimuli GR Affect R
R
as Cues
MR
R

Brand representation is activated through goal representation and associated with

positive affect as a means to attain the goal

Figure 2.1. Development of Interaction Process with a Brand

 37

maintain (or recover), and the representations are intrinsically linked to positive affect (Custers

and Aarts, 2005; Fitzsimons et al., 2008).

Once goal representations are activated by cues, they elicit the associated positive affect

(e.g., feelings or emotions), and subsequently, can motivate individuals to engage in mental or

physical activities (e.g., thinking or behaviors) (Custers and Aarts, 2005; Bargh et al., 2001; Shah,

2003; Cartrand et al., 2008). Meanwhile, traits and stereotype representations are also known to

induce some of these responses (e.g., ideomotor action; James, 1890; Bargh et al., 1996; Wheeler

et al., 2007), but they are usually not associated with positive affect and therefore do not have

motivational properties (Sela and Shiv, 2009; Fitzsimons et al., 2008). However, goal

representations and such semantic constructs (i.e., traits or stereotype representations) may

become closely associated through further activation by the related cues (In this context, a brand

and the related stimuli), and as a result, they may develop a somewhat schematic structure

regarding the mental representation of the specific cues (i.e., brand representation) (Fitzsimons et

al., 2008; Gilliath et al., 2006). Supporting this notion, past studies suggest that goal

representations can become activated via semantic constructs, subsequently eliciting affective,

motivational, and behavioral responses (Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Sela and Shiv, 2009; Wheeler et

al., 2007; Bargh et al., 2001).

Thus, in addition to the accessibility strength to the related mental representations from

the brand information, goal representations and the associated positive affect are considered to

determine the nature and intensity of responses evoked by such cues. Individuals are usually

aware of those responses (Chartrand, 2005). Accordingly, Barkus et al.s (2009) brand

experience scale is assumed to capture the nature and intensity, here.

 38

Meanwhile, as such goal representations become chronically accessible from brand-

related stimuli, and accordingly, those stimuli become able to consistently elicit the associated

positive affects, other environmental cues and mental representations related to the brand (i.e.,

traits or stereotypes, etc.) may activate goal representations, and subsequently, activate the brand

representations associated with the goal (Fitzsimons et al., 2008). In such cases, the brand

representations are perceived as a means or resource to attain or maintain the desired states,

while evoking positive affects (and other responses) associated with the states (Fitzsimons et al.,

2008). Self-expansion theory (Aaron and Aaron, 1986) suggest that, once a brand is recognized

as a means or resource to potentially realize the goal states, the positive affect may facilitate

individuals attachment to the brand.

As discussed in the previous section, the theory posits that individuals have an essential

motive to expand their self-concept, seeking to enhance their potential self-efficacy (Aron and

Aron, 1986; Aron et al, 2001). Such self-expansion is attained by including the concept of others

into their self-concept, when such others are recognized as resources that facilitate any goals that

might arise (Aron et al., 2001). As the self-expansion process proceeds, individuals come to

perceive the resources as parts of themselves (even when individuals do not actually possess

such resources, as already discussed) (Aron and Aron, 1986; Aron et al., 2001; Aron, Paris, Aron,

1995; Aron et al., 1991). As a result, those individuals begin to feel as if the ability of the

resources to achieve the goals is their own (Aron and Aron, 1986; Aron et al., 2001). Thus, self-

expansion leads to higher potential self-efficacy (and self-esteem) (Aron et al., 2001).

According to the self-expansion theory, self-expansion process itself produces positive

arousals that reflect perception of enhanced potential self-efficacy (Aaron et al., 2005; Aaron et

al., 2001; Aaron and Aaron, 1986). The intensity of such arousals is considered to reflect the
 39

extent of self-expansion that the resources facilitate during the process (accordingly, the degree

of perceived enhancement of potential self-efficacy) (Aron et al., 2001; Aron et al., 1995).

However, individuals may not be aware of the source of those arousals (i.e., self-expansion

process), so they may not be able to attribute them to the process itself (Wheeler et al., 2007).

With regard to this, research suggests that individuals form expectations regarding the degree of

self-expansion (and the ensuing enhancement of self-efficacy), based on the positive arousals

associated with goals attained by such resources. (arousal-attraction effect; Aaron et al., 2001;

Foster et al., 1998; Aaron and Aaron, 1986; Dutton and Aaron, 1974) Also, the theory implies

that enhancement of self-efficacy should be realized by obtaining the ability of the sources to

facilitate attractive goals, as a part of the self (Aaron et al., 2001). Therefore, positive arousals

associated with such goals can be considered the critical determinants of the self-expansion

motive.

Once the self-expansion process proceeds, individuals perceive enhancement of self-

efficacy (and self-esteem) with intense positive arousals, by which they can experience strong

affirmation of their self-concept (Aaron et al., 1995; Aaron et al., 2001; Fournier, 1998). Because

of this self-affirmation, those individuals are prompted to further interactions and the ensuing

development of close relationship with the resources, which ultimately leads to their emotional

attachment to those resources (Aaron and Aaron, 1986; Aaron et al, 1995; Aaron et al., 1991;

Aaron et al., 2001; Fournier, 1998). Thus, attachment formation through self-expansion can be

understood as a positive reinforcement process (Fournier et al., 1998). In such cases, the theory,

accordingly, implies that fearing of potential loss of self-efficacy will lead to proximity

maintenance and actual loss will result in separation distress, both of which are distinctive

characteristics of emotional attachment, as discussed previously. It should be noted that,

 40

although the self-expansion process itself produces strong positive arousals that expedites further

interactions, the intensity is considered still to necessarily reflect the strength of positive arousals

associated with the goals fulfilled by the resources. For example, once the goals became

unattractive and the associated arousals disappear, the resources will become unable to enhance

self-efficacy and elicit strong positive arousals that they did before (Aron and Aron, 1986).

Therefore, the goal-associated positive arousals can be considered the fundamental determinants

of the reinforcement process and the resulting attachment.

When the above argument is applied to the current context, the following can be said.

First, since brands can be regarded as resources to attain certain goals, individuals may apply

them to the self-expansion process, seeking to enhance their self-efficacy. Second, although the

process itself evokes positive arousals that could motivate self-expansion, individuals form

expectation of the degree of self-expansion (and therefore, enhancement of self-efficacy) based

on the intensity of positive arousals associated with the goals that those brands facilitate. This

can be considered basically the same positive affect and responses that a brand experience scale

is assumed to capture. Third, self-expansion process is a positive reinforcement process. During

the process, individuals experience enhancement of self-efficacy and strong positive arousals

through interactions with such brands, which serves affirmation of their self-concept. The self-

affirmation directs individuals to further interactions and development of close relationships over

time, leading to their emotional attachment to the brands. In sum, although the feeling of self-

affirmation itself may reinforce this attachment formation process, it is considered that the

motivation strength is intrinsically determined by the intensity of positive arousals attached to

the brand-related goals, here again. Thus, those positive arousals, which brand experience scale

is assumed to capture, should positively affect emotional attachment to brands (Figure 2.2).
 41

Brand Experience (Positive Responses)

MR
R

Brand / Positive
B
Stimuli GR Affect R
R
as Cues
MR
R

Intensive Brand Experience

motivates Self-Expansion

Positive Reinforcement
Interactions

Self-Efficacy &
Self-Affirmation Self-Expansion
Positive Arousals

Emotional Attachment to the Brand

Figure 2.2. Brand Experience and Self-Expansion Process

 42

Therefore, it is expected that

- H3: Brand experience has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand

attachment.

That is, the higher the brand experience of a brand, the higher the emotional brand

attachment to the brand.

2.5 Interaction Effect of Self-Congruity and Brand Experience

On the basis of the previous arguments regarding self-congruity theory and brand

experience based on self-expansion theory, the following interaction effect of self-congruity and

brand experience on emotional brand attachment can be proposed. With regard to self-congruity,

it was argued that self-concept, which reflects activated self-schemata, functions as selection

mechanism in information processing (Markus and Wurf, 1987; Markus, 1977; Aaker, 1999).

Especially in this context, it was shown that ideal-self image and actual self-image, two self-

representations in self-concept, are the key drivers of consumers preference for brands in self-

expressive product categories, in that consumers tend to selectively focus on brands whose brand

images are congruent with their ideal self-images or actual self-images (Sirgy, 1986; 1982).

Furthermore, it was suggested that consumers are motivated to interact with those brands by

different self-motives depending on the self-images the brands reflect (Sirgy, 1986; Malar et al.,

2011). That is, in some occasions, consumers are facilitated to interact with brands whose brand

images are congruent with their ideal images when they are motivated to enhance their self-

images (i.e., by self-enhancement motive). In some other cases, consumers are expedited to

interact with brands whose brand images are congruent with their actual self-images when they

are motivated to maintain or restore their self-images (i.e., self-verification motive). Based on

these arguments, it was also proposed that such interactions with brands lead consumers to
 43

emotional attachment to the brands through self-expansion process (Malar et al, 2011; Fournier,

1998).

Among those self-congruent brands, consumers are likely to choose such brands that

evoke stronger positive responses than brands with weaker positive responses, according to the

self-expansion theory (Aron et al., 2001; Fournier, 1998). Last discussion regarding self-

expansion process suggests that consumers are motivated to include the brands concepts as a

part of their own self-concept (i.e., self-expansion) as a means or resources to attain those desired

states, aiming to enhance their potential self-efficacy (Aron and Aron, 1986; Aron et al., 2001). It

was also argued that consumers form expectation of self-expansion and the subsequent

enhancement of potential self-efficacy based on positive responses that the brands evoke, the

intensity of which is reflected as brand experience (Aron et al., 2001). Thus, in general, it is

considered that consumers selectively focus on such brands that are congruent with their ideal or

actual self-images and induced to interact with such brands, and thereafter, among those brands,

they are especially motivated to further interact with specific brands that evoke stronger positive

responses rather than weaker positive responses. As a result, those specific brands are more

likely to become attached by the consumers through self-expansion process.

By contrast, other research suggests the other way. That is, it is also possible that brands

associated with strong brand experience themselves activate consumers ideal or actual-self

images, leading to the ensuing emotional attachment. Previous research has consistently found

that priming stimuli can activate specific parts of self-concept and change the subsequent

responses in various social contexts (e.g., Barkowitz, 1984; Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg,

1998). Based on these findings, Wheeler et al.s (2007) active-self account suggests that, when

brand stimuli worked as priming stimuli, they can temporarily activate specific parts of self-
 44

concept relevant to the brands, which, in turn, affects individuals' various responses, such as

feelings, emotions, motivations, and behaviors. In the current context, this implies that brands

stimuli can activate individuals ideal or actual self-images, and the specific images can

selectively direct their attention to the brands, eliciting the resulting responses. In fact, recent

studies (Fitzsimons et al., 2008; Sela and Shiv, 2009) found that brand stimuli can cause such

responses that are related to the brand-specific ideal or actual images. For example, in an

experiment, the respondents were motivated to do some creative task, after an exposure to

Apple logo mark (Fitzsimons et al., 2008). Those studies also revealed that people whose goals

(i.e., ideal or actual self-image) include the brand-related desire states were significantly more

motivated to engage in such tasks than those whose goals were not concerned with such states.

Thus, previous research suggests that brand stimuli can temporarily activate ideal or actual self-

images and evoke various positive responses. Therefore, it can be considered that such brand

stimuli may motivate consumers to interact with those brands and lead to self-expansion when

the stimuli continuously and consistently activate them.

In either way, it is considered that self-congruity and strong positive responses (as brand

experience) interactively or jointly work, and affect the driving forces toward the resulting

emotional brand attachment. This interactive process can be explained as follows, based on the

above discussion. On the one hand, individuals are motivated to selectively direct their focus on

such brands that are congruent with their ideal self-image or actual self-image, and the brand

stimuli will activate a part of self-concept that corresponds to the self-image, eliciting positive

responses (i.e., self-congruity brand experience). On the other hand, when some brand stimuli

activate a part of self-concept that may be congruent with their specific ideal self-image or actual

self-image and elicit strong positive responses, such strong responses will motivate them to
 45

selectively focus on the specific brands, reflecting the activated ideal self-image or actual self-

image (i.e., brand experience self-congruity). These two processes will work interactively and

reinforce further interactions with a specific brand, facilitating further inclusion of the brand

concept into their own self-concept (i.e., emotional brand attachment) through self-expansion

processes. As a result of such interaction effects between self-congruity and brand experience,

with regards to the positive effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment, it is

expected that the positive relationship between self-congruity and emotional brand attachment is

stronger when brand experience (i.e., positive responses elicited by the brand stimuli) is strong

than when it is weak.

This argument can be summarized in the following hypotheses.

For ideal self-congruity,

H4: The interaction between ideal self-congruity and brand experience has a

positive effect on emotional brand attachment, such that the direct positive effect of

ideal self-congruity on emotional brand attachment is significantly greater when

brand experience is high than when brand experience is low.

For actual self-congruity,

H5: The interaction between actual self-congruity and brand experience has a

positive effect on emotional brand attachment, such that the direct positive effect of

actual self-congruity on emotional brand attachment is significantly greater when

brand experience is high than when brand experience is low.

 46

2.6 Outcomes of Emotional Brand Attachment

In order to argue the practical implications of marketing efforts regarding the theories as

well as the effects discussed thus far, two outcome variables of emotional brand attachment -

willingness to pay a brand premium and likelihood of positive word of mouth - were included in

the models of this study. These outcomes were chosen for the following couple of reasons. First,

these two outcome variables can be directly related to behavioral commitments or financial

investments, which are characterized as outcomes of strong emotional brand attachment by

previous literature (e.g., Thomson et al., 2005; Park et al., 2010). Second, these two outcomes

were preferred because these variables do not necessarily assume a consumer's usage experiences

or possessions of brands. As discussed above, the interest of the current study is not limited to

direct interactions with brands. Rather, this study intends to capture the influences of indirect

interactions as well. Inversely, for this reason, such outcomes as brand loyalty (which

intrinsically assumes usage experiences or possessions of brands (e.g., Oliver, 1999)) were not

chosen.

2.6.1 Willingness to Pay a Brand Premium

Willingness to pay a brand premium (WTP) refers to the extent to which a consumer is

willing to pay a higher price for his/her preferred brand over comparable/lesser brands in the

same product category (Netmeyer et al., 2004). This construct is also known as one of the

strongest indicators of brand loyalty (Aaker, 1997). Willingness to pay a brand premium can be

understood as a form of consumers' investment for their relationship with brands (Thomson et al.,

2005; Fedorikhin et al., 2008). With regards to such investments, recent studies suggest that

when attachment to a brand is stronger, individuals are more motivated to willingly make

sacrifices of their personal resources such as money, time, and energy, so that they can develop
 47

or continue a close relationship with the brand (Thomson et al., 2005; Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006;

Park et al., 2006; 2010). As previously argued, such consumers' willingness to sacrifice their

resources can be manifested as behavioral commitments (e.g., brand loyalty) or financial

investments (e.g., willingness to pay a brand premium) (Thomson et al., 2005). Thus, the

literature suggests that there is a positive effect of emotional brand attachment on willingness to

pay a brand premium. This prediction has been consistently supported by empirical evidence in

the past studies (e.g., Thomson et al., 2005; Fedorikhin et al., 2008; Park et al., 2010). Therefore,

it is expected that emotional brand attachment is positively related to willingness to pay a brand

premium.

This argument can be summarized in the following hypotheses.

- H6: Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on willingness to

pay a brand premium (WTP).

That is, the higher the emotional attachment to a brand, the higher the willingness

to pay a brand premium to the brand.

2.6.2 Likelihood of Positive Word of Mouth

Positive word of mouth refers to informal, person-to-person communication between a

perceived noncommercial communicator and a receiver regarding a brand, a product, and

organization , or a service, such as making recommendations to others or extolling a company's

quality orientation, and so on (Brown et al., 2005; Harrison-Walker 2001). As discussed above, it

is purported that a consumer with strong emotional attachment to a brand is willingly to make

sacrifices of their personal resources. Such motivations can also lead to various brand supporting

behaviors, such as extended search for the brand, involvement in brand communities, or making

recommendations to others (i.e., positive word of mouth) (Park et al., 2006; 2010). In addition,
 48

for consumers with an elevated attachment to a brand, positive thoughts and feelings (activated

by the rich set of schema or affectively-laden memories) about the brand are easily accessible,

and the resulting prominence of favorable thoughts and feelings is postulated to lead them to

devote cognitive, emotional and behavioral resources to the target of attachment (Park et al.,

2006; Fedorikhin et al., 2008). Furthermore, Park et al. (2006) even maintain that such

consumers tend to be willing to face the risk of social ridicule, discredit or social rejection, which

may be caused by publicly advocating or promoting the brand, because of their strong

attachment to the brand. Thus, the literature, as a whole, suggests that the stronger a brand

attachment is, the more likely a consumer engages in spreading positive word of mouth. This

prediction has been also consistently supported by empirical evidence in the past studies (e.g.,

Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006; Fedorikhin et al., 2008; Park et al., 2010; Batra et al., 2012).

Therefore, it is expected that emotional brand attachment is positively related to likelihood of

positive word of mouth.

This argument can be summarized in the following hypotheses.

- H3: Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on likelihood of

positive word of mouth (WOM).

That is, the higher the emotional brand attachment to a brand, the higher the

likelihood of positive word of mouth for the brand.

2.7 Model Summary

The central purpose of this research is to examine the interaction effects between self-

congruity and brand experience, which are supposed to determine the intensity of emotional

brand attachment. Reflecting the research purpose, the general conceptual framework (Figure

2.3) includes brand experience and self-congruity as independent variables, along with their
 49

interaction term. The literature review suggested that these two factors interact with each other

and the combined effect will lead to a stronger emotional brand attachment, which is the

dependent variable, than otherwise.

In addition, the general model is designed to examine the individual effects of each

independent variable on emotional brand attachment. One is the effect of self-congruity on

emotional brand attachment. The other is the effect of brand experience on emotional brand

attachment, which has not yet been examined. Each of these is postulated to strengthen the

subsequent emotional brand attachment. Finally, emotional brand attachment is posited to create

positive influences on two outcomes in the model: the positive effects of emotional brand

attachment on willingness to pay a brand premium as well as on likelihood of positive word of

mouth.

Each of ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity influences emotional brand

attachment through distinct psychological processes and their interaction effects with brand

experience are conceptually independent, as discussed in detail. Therefore, each is examined

independently in separate models. The conceptual models are presented in Figure 2.4. The two

models also map the proposed hypotheses. These hypotheses are also listed in Table 2.1.
 50

Brand Experience
(BE)
Willingness to Pay a
(Positive Impact of Brand Stimuli)
Brand Premium
(WTP)

BE-SC Emotional Brand

Attachment
Interaction
(BA)

Likelihood of Positive
Word of Mouth
Self-Image Congruity (WOM)
(SC)
(Actual/Ideal)

Figure 2.3. General Conceptual Framework

 51

Model 1: Conceptual Model to analyze the effects of Ideal Self-Congruity

Brand Experience
Willingness to Pay a
(BE)
Brand Premium
H3 (WTP)
H6

BE-ISC H4 Emotional Brand

Attachment
Interaction (BA)

H7
H1 Likelihood of Positive
Ideal Self-Image Word of Mouth
Congruity (ISC) (WOM)

Model 2: Conceptual Model to analyze the effects of Actual Self-Congruity

Brand Experience
Willingness to Pay a
(BE)
Brand Premium
H3 (WTP)
H6

BE-ASC Emotional Brand

H5 H7
Attachment
Interaction (BA)

H7
H2 Likelihood of Positive
Actual Self-Image Word of Mouth
Congruity (ASC) (WOM)

Figure 2.4. Conceptual Models and Proposed Hypotheses

 52

Table 2.1
List of Research Hypothesis

Research Hypotheses

H1 Ideal self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand

attachment.

H2 Actual self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand

attachment.

H3 Brand experience has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand attachment.

H4 The interaction between ideal self-congruity and brand experience has a positive
effect on emotional brand attachment, such that the direct positive effect of ideal
self-congruity on emotional brand attachment is significantly greater when brand
experience is high than when brand experience is low.

H5 The interaction between actual self-congruity and brand experience has a positive
effect on emotional brand attachment, such that the direct positive effect of actual
self-congruity on emotional brand attachment is significantly greater when brand
experience is high than when brand experience is low.

H6 Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on willingness to pay
a brand premium (WTP).

Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on positive word of
H7 mouth (WOM).
 53

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Overview

This chapter details the research methodology in this study and is divided into the

following five parts. The first section describes the research design of the study along with its

rationale. The second section describes the procedures used to collect the data. Next, the

operationalization of the constructs, and thereafter, their reliability and validity testing are

detailed. Finally, the statistical analyses used for the hypothesis testing are explained.

3.2 Research Design

The main objective of this study is to test the hypothetical relationships proposed in

Chapter 2. The context for the study is U.S. consumers as the target population and emotional

attachments to self-expressive brands that were formed by various kinds of past interactions with

brands in their actual experience. This research intended to capture the influence of such past

experiences and individuals emotional bonds with the brands they cherish through those

interactions. For this purpose, a survey was conducted mainly using online samples and several

brands selected based on a pretest.

3.2.1 Sample Characteristics

In this study, online samples were mainly used, primarily because online samples can be

constructed to better represent the target population (i.e., U.S. consumers), and so can attain

higher generalizability of the results, than would be the case using convenient samples. In

addition, some of the online survey solution providers offer customized group of respondents,

which enables researchers to limit the respondents based on their properties. Other advantages of
 54

this approach include that providers can offer fast feedback at reasonable costs, and also they

have been recognized as reliable sources of data in social sciences (Paolacci et al., 2010).

3.2.2 The Focal Brands

As discussed in the introduction section, the target product category from which the focal

brands were chosen was determined based on the following two conditions. As the primary

consideration, symbolic or self-expressive benefits are usually related to underlying needs for

personal expression and outer-directed self-esteem (Keller, 1993). Therefore, the target category

was selected from such categories that are socially visible or publicly consumed (i.e., those that

are seen by others when the products are being used) (Bourne, 1957), while privately consumed

categories (i.e., those that are not seen during the use or consumption with the possible

exception) (Bourne, 1957) are excluded. Meanwhile, as Aaker (1997) points out, there are

differences in the extent to which a specific brand is more or less self-expressive than other

brands, even in the same self-expressive product categories. For example in case of the

automobile category, one person may ride a sport car brand to show off his coolness, where as

another person may use a much cheaper brand just to satisfy his living needs without caring how

others would think of. One of the major interests in this research is to explicate how such

differences in self-expressive natures come arise and affect the subsequent outcomes, such as

emotional brand attachment, even in such identical product categories. For this reason, although

some "self-expressive brands," which are considered to be salient in self-expressive or symbolic

features, and their effects are the main concern in the research, other less symbolic brands are

included in the selection of the focal brands (i.e., no further constraints were imposed to

specifically choose self-expressive brands).

 55

In addition, as the second condition of the target product category, relatively more

durable goods than fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) were preferred. In other words, such a

product category that is typically used longer than one year is the scope of the current study

(Hereafter, such products are called non-fast-moving consumer goods or non-FMCG). This

limitation is set based on the following discussion also made in the introduction section. One of

the basic assumptions in this study is that individuals social roles influence their perception of

brands, ultimately affecting the formation of emotional brand attachment. As for fast-moving

consumer goods, which consumers can select depending on time and occasion (e.g., perfumes,

beers), Aaker (1999) found that consumers information processing is susceptible to the temporal

context of their situations. Accordingly, the effect of individuals social roles is less likely to be

detectable in such categories than durable goods that are not easily replaced depending on such

transitory impacts. Therefore, as the second condition of the target product category, non-fast-

moving consumer goods were selected, in order to more focus on the continuous influence of

individuals social role, which is assumed to be critical in the formation of brand attachment,

rather than temporal influence of the situations.

With regards to the selection of the focal brands in the target product category, the only

condition needed to be satisfied was high brand awareness, so that respondents can reasonably

answer to the questions in the survey. The main focus in this study is to explicate the interaction

effects of self-congruity and brand experience on emotional brand attachment. Considering that

many studies have already examined self-congruity effects on the subsequent outcomes, the

especially intriguing issue is whether brand experience amplifies the effects of self-congruity on

those outcomes. Accordingly, the diversity in the focal brands was welcomed in order to create

variability in the responses (especially regarding brand experience, self-congruity, and brand
 56

attachment) that would make it easier to detect the proposed effects. For this reason, the other

conditions were not specifically established.

The above three conditions were examined using a survey in the pretest as explained

below. Before the survey phase, a review of recent brand literature was conducted. On the basis

of the literature review, and the subsequent considerations based on expert judgments,

smartphones were selected as the target product category because of its desirable characteristics

for the current purpose, as detailed in the next section. In addition, several candidates of the focal

brands were also chosen from major smartphone brands based on the brand literature and actual

market data. Accordingly, in the survey phase, the appropriateness of smartphones as the target

category was examined in terms of the first two conditions regarding product category.

Following this, five focal brands were chosen from the candidate brands mainly based on the

third condition, brand awareness. The procedures are detailed below.

3.3 Data Collection

A pretest was conducted to confirm the suitability of smartphones as the target product

category and to select the focal brands used in the main study. Following this, data collection of

the main study was executed to test the proposed hypotheses using the brands selected in the

pretest.

3.3.1 Procedure for Pretest - Selection of Focal Brands

As discussed above, a pretest was conducted to select the focal brands. The pretest

consisted of two phases. First, the brand literature was reviewed to select candidate product

categories that may fit the two conditions of the target category discussed above. From the

candidate categories, smartphones were selected as the target product category (based on expert

judgments) for the reasons discussed below. Next, a survey was implemented in order to verify
 57

suitability of smartphones as the target category for the current purpose and also to select the

focal brands used for the hypothesis testing in the main study.

In the review of recent brand literature, the following product categories were identified

as ones that may fit the two basic conditions discussed above (i.e., publicly consumed products

and non-FMCG): smartphones (e.g., Cheng et al., 2012); laptops (e.g., Gao et al., 2009); MP3s

(e.g., Chatterjee and Rose, 2012); jeans (e.g., Swaminathan et al., 2009); sport shoes (e.g.,

Chernev et al., 2011); and cars (e.g., Esch et al., 2012). Among these categories, smartphones

were selected because of their desirable characteristics mentioned below.

As the primary considerations, the following desirable characteristics of the smartphone

category were revealed mainly based on the market data. First, in the market, only 5 top brands

cover approximately 90% of the share (Nielsen, 2012a). This implies that the survey can be

effectively administered using a less complicated system, while the results can achieve a higher

extent of generalizability across the entire market. Second, the price range of this category is

considerably less than other product categories such as cars or laptops. Accordingly, this

category is suitable to examine the effects of differences derived from brands. Third, the

possession rate exceeds 50% and is still rapidly growing in the U.S. market (Nielsen, 2012b).

Therefore, the results may create more direct managerial implications than other less active

product categories. Finally, in a similar vein, the markets of a variety of digital devices (laptops,

MP3s, tablets, etc) have also grown rapidly in recent years and most of the players are

competing in these markets using the same brand names as the major smartphones (e.g., Apple,

SONY, and Samsung - smartphones, laptops, MP3s, and tablets; BlackBerry and Motorola -

smartphones and tablets). Therefore, the results of the current study may have still further

generalizability across these growing markets, and so may provide marketing managers with
 58

valuable implications, possibly applicable across markets of digital devices, including those

under development.

The secondary considerations were made regarding the characteristics of the brands in the

category. The following desirable features were found also here. First, the smartphone category

includes Apple, which has been considered relevant to desired states and found to elicit goal-

relevant responses or evoke intense positive brand experience in previous studies (Fitzsimons et

al., 2008; Brakus et al., 2009). This brand is also known for strong customer attachment as one of

"iconic brands" (Holt, 2004). Second, it is also found that some of the brands evoke strong brand

experience (i.e., psychological and behavioral responses), while others elicit only weak brand

experience (Brakus et al., 2009). These properties of the brands were considered desirable for the

current purpose because they would help create variability in responses, and therefore, obtain

clear results in testing the hypothesized effects.

On the basis of these considerations, smartphones were selected as the target category in

this study, and were tested for appropriateness as the target category in the survey. The survey

included 5 other product categories mentioned above and tablets as another related category, in

order to examine the suitability of smartphone category regarding the aforementioned two

conditions in relation to them. Also, seven major smartphone brands (Apple, Samsung,

BlackBerry, HTC, Motorola, NOKIA, and SonyEricsson) were chosen as the candidate brands

mainly based on the market share, and were examined to select the focal brands in the same

survey, as explained below.

In the subsequent survey, data collection was conducted as follows. Respondents in the

study were drawn from students enrolled in an undergraduate course at a major Midwestern

university. The researcher asked for instructor's permission to contact students, and students
 59

were solicited in class to participate in the survey for extra credit. Following this, students were

contacted via email, the purpose of the survey was explained, and their further participation was

requested. In emails sent to students, a survey link to the online questionnaire was attached,

along with a cover letter including brief instructions. Approximately 100 undergraduate students

were invited to participate in the pretest. Before launching the pretest, the researcher had

obtained an approval for the entire procedures from human subject committee of Southern

Illinois University.

The online questionnaire consisted of two sets of questions. First, in order to examine

appropriateness of smartphones as the target category for the study, an item of Publicly/Privately

consumed product scale (Bearden and Etzel, 1982) and an item to ask expected period of use

(Kobayashi, 2005) were included. The main reason to use these scale was to verify that

smartphones as a product category fit the two essential conditions discussed above: a) Publicly

consumed or socially visible product category when it is used; and b) non-fast moving

consumption goods. Also, for the other six product categories, which had been chosen mainly

from the literature review, the same questions were asked to further justify the use of

smartphones in comparison with these categories.

The second set of questions related to the brand awareness (Yoo and Donthu, 2001) and

brand familiarity scales (Kent and Allen, 1994). These scales were used to select the focal brands,

from the seven major brands of smartphones that were identified as candidate brands in the

literature review and the subsequent judgment. The brand awareness scale served as the main

criterion for selection, and the brand familiarity scale was used supplementally, as detailed in the

following chapter. The survey instrument is presented in Appendix A.

 60

3.3.2 Procedure for Main Study

In the main study, the survey was conducted using a web-based questionnaire, for the

following reasons: 1) this method allows participants to fill out the questionnaire in their spare

time, which improves the response rate (Assael and Keon, 1982); 2) an online questionnaire

allows for the presentation of graphical stimuli, such as brand logos; and 3) most importantly,

web-based survey software provides a flexible interface that enables one to randomly assign

different questionnaires to each respondent, which is the critical procedure of this study as

discussed later. The online questionnaire was developed using Qualtrics, which offers an easy

and intelligible user interface, while allowing sophisticated and flexible analytics.

Participants of the main study were drawn from active members of Amazon.coms

Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Mechanical Turk is an Internet survey solution provider that has

recently become popular among social scientists as a source of data for academic studies

(Paolacci et al., 2010). Participants were recruited on the website in exchange for 50 cents as

compensation. Respondents were U.S. residents who promised good quality of data, who were

automatically screened by Mechanical Turk according to criteria stipulated by the researcher.

Participants made the decision to participate based on the cover letter presented on Mechanical

Turk website (see Appendix B for survey instrument). Those who decided to participate were

instructed to visit the online questionnaire through the link contained in the cover letter. When

they accessed the Qualtrics website, a questionnaire for one of the five brands was randomly

assigned to each participant.

The questionnaire consisted of a description of the study, brand logo, the question items

for the main constructs, as well as items to gather demographic information. After the description

of the study, respondents were asked to answer the question items related to the main model
 61

constructs, such as emotional brand attachment (BA), brand experience (BE), ideal and actual

self-congruity (ISC, ASC), and two outcomes, willingness to pay a brand premium (WTP) and

positive word of mouth (WOM). Following that, they were referred to the demographic

questions including gender, age, income, ethnicity and levels of education. The entire data

collection process was completed within a four day period. After the survey was closed,

participant IDs (as a registered member of Mechanical Turk) were checked to confirm that there

were no multiple trials by the same individuals.

In order to satisfy the requirement to use a SEM in the subsequent statistical analysis, the

desired sample size was 300. This sample size not only exceeds 200 (considered a goal for SEM),

but also satisfies a conventional requirement of more than 5 respondents per parameter (Hair et

al., 2006; Bentler and Chou, 1987). Moreover, power analysis (guided by MacCallum et al.,

1996) suggests that, with a sample size of 300, the power of this model approaches 0.99,

indicating that the sample is sufficient for SEM, given our model with 650 degrees of freedom at

the 0.05 of alpha level. Another power analysis for ANOVA (G-Power) to test the proposed

interaction effects also suggests that a sample size of 300 also produces a power of 0.99,

assuming the effect size of 0.25. Therefore, a sample size of 300 was deemed a reasonable goal

for the current study.

3.4 Operationalization of Constructs

Hypothesis testing deals with the six major constructs described in the conceptual model:

self-congruity (actual/ideal); brand experience; emotional brand attachment; willingness to pay a

brand premium, and positive word of mouth. Scales and items for the study are shown in

Appendix B. All theoretical constructs were measured using previously developed multi-item

scales. Some of the items are partly reworded to adjust to the study's context. Also, seven-point
 62

scales were adopted for these constructs, while different types of anchoring were used depending

on the nature of the concepts.

In order to measure emotional brand attachment, Park et al.s (2010) brand attachment

scale was used. This scale was recently developed by the authors of the original scale of

emotional brand attachment (Thomson et al., 2005). The improved scale was adopted because it

was deemed a superior option to the original scale for the following reasons.

While Thomson, et al.s scale is widely used and therefore may be useful for a

comparison of results with other studies, the following issues needed to be addressed in this

context: 1) Swaminathan et al. (2009) point out that Thomson et al.s scale is susceptible to the

influence of difference in brand personality. For example, the affection dimension of

emotional brand attachment tends to reflect sincerity brand personalities more than other

personality dimensions, while items that measure the passion dimension of the attachment

scale are more sensitive to excitement brand personalities than others; and 2) items in

Thomson et al.s scale essentially measures specific facets of consumers emotions derived from

emotional relationship with brands, while affective dimension of brand experience aims to

capture consumers emotional responses in general. Although what should be captured is

conceptually distinctive, it was considered possible that these two measures may suffer from

confounding, because both focus solely on emotional responses.

On the other hand, Park et al.s refined scale was considered to be able to address these

issues by not directly focusing on emotional responses resulting from brand attachment. Rather,

the five items are intended to capture the degree of conceptual overlap between self-image and

brand image. This self-brand image overlap is the core of the concept of emotional brand

attachment and also the theoretical foundation in explaining the formation process, as was
 63

discussed throughout the previous chapter. Thus, this scale seemed appropriate for the purpose of

this study, while addressing issues that the original scale intrinsically suffered from. In addition,

the scale focuses on measuring the amount of positive connection between self-image and brand

image by carefully adjusting its anchoring (i.e., Not at all Extremely). Brand attachment is

understood, to reflect the positive connections between a consumer and a brand. Because of this

thoughtful construction, not implemented in the original scale, the refined scale was considered a

superior option.

Based on these considerations, Park et al.s (2010) the brand attachment scale was used to

measure emotional brand attachment. The five items are presented in Appendix B. Each of the

original items was adjusted to fit the current context. Using these five items, respondents were

asked to indicate the extent of emotional connection with a brand, especially regarding self-brand

image overlap.

Self-congruity was measured using five items, adopted from Sirgy et al.s (1997) global

measures, for each of two types of self-congruity (ideal/actual). Each of the items is adjusted

following Malar et al.s (2011) wording (e.g., The personality of brand X is consistent with how

I see myself/how I would like to be). Respondents were asked to indicate the extent of

agreement or disagreement (i.e., 7-point Likert scale) with each of the 5 items concerning the

congruity between self-image and the brand personality. Moreover, instructions for respondents

to recall their own self-image and brand image were included in the questionnaire to improve the

quality of the responses (following Malar et al., 2011). The items are presented in Appendix B.

Furthermore, in order to help respondents describe brand image in mind more clearly, a couple

of devices were implemented before the self-congruity scale. First, in an open-ended question,

each respondent was asked to provide a short description of the overall image of a brand they
 64

own. This question was adopted from Aaker (1999), along with its detailed instructions.

Following this, a brand personality scale (Aaker, 1997; 1999) was used to let respondents

imagine the brand image more concretely. The fifteen items (Appendix B) were intended to help

them associate the brand image with different aspects of its personality-like characteristics so

that they can more easily and properly respond to the ensuing self-congruity scales.

Brand experience is measured using a scale adopted from Brakus et al. (2009), including

three items for each of four aspects (i.e., sensory experience, affective experience,

intellectual experience, and behavioral experience). Besides these, two additional items for

each dimension were adopted from Brakus (2001) in order to address concerns of possible issues

relating to model identification after scale purification. Based on the literature, modifications

were made for the items to measure the amount of the positive impact of brand experience.

Following Brakus et al.s (2009) directions, modifiers such as positive were added to each item

(if needed) to clarify the ambiguity of expressions (for example, This brand makes a strong

positive impression on my visual sense or other senses). Following this, marketing experts (i.e.,

marketing professors and doctoral students) were consulted with regards to the face validity and

readability of several possible options for each item. Based on their suggestions, the best options

were chosen, and minimal modifications were done (In fact, the original expressions were

basically retained). In accordance with this modification, scale anchoring was adjusted to Not at

all Extremely, following study 3 in Brakus et al. (2009).

In the scale, respondents were asked to indicate the positive impacts of a brand

experience with each of the 20 items with regards to their sensory, affective, intellectual, and

behavioral responses evoked by the brand. The scale items are presented in Appendix B. Similar

to the self-congruity scale, an open-ended question was presented before the brand experience
 65

scale in order to improve the quality of responses. This question was adopted based on Brakus et

als (2009) procedure of scale development (including instructions). In this question, the concept

of brand experience was briefly explained, and they were asked to describe their impressions

of the brand, based on past interactions with the brand or brand-related information, aiming at

inducing better responses in the subsequent sets of brand experience scale.

Two outcomes of brand attachment proposed in the hypotheses were used: 1) willingness

to pay a brand premium (WTP) was measured using a scale adopted from Netemeyer et al.

(2004). Respondents were asked to indicate the extent of agreement or disagreement (i.e., 7-point

Likert scale) with each of the 3 items as to whether they were willing to pay a higher price for

the brand than others; and 2) likelihood of positive word of mouth (WOM) was measured using a

scale adopted from Maxham and Netmeyer (2003). Respondents were asked to indicate the

extent of agreement or disagreement (i.e., 7-point Likert scale) with each of the 3 items

concerning likelihood that they will spread positive information about the brand or recommend

the brand if they are consulted about purchasing a product in the category. The scale items of

willingness to pay a brand premium (WTP) and likelihood of positive word of mouth (WOM)

are presented in Appendix B.

3.5 Assessment of Validity and Reliability

Validity is defined as the degree to which instruments accurately measure the constructs

they purport to measure (Churchill, 1979; Hair et al., 2006), and reliability refers to the degree to

which instruments are consistent in what they intended to measure (Churchill, 1979; Hair et al.,

2006). In order to examine the reliability of the measures used in this study, the internal

consistency of each scale was assessed using composite reliability and Cronbachs alpha

(Cronbach, 1951; Nunnally, 1978). The acceptable threshold value of alpha (as well as
 66

composite reliability) is 0.7 in marketing research (Nunnaly and Bernstein, 1994; Fornell and

Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2006; Bagozzi and Yi, 1988).

On the other hand, construct validity is achieved by establishing convergent and

discriminant validity (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). Convergent validity assesses the degree to

which different indicators of the same construct are highly related, while discriminant validity

evaluates the degree to which a construct is different from other related constructs (Hair et al.,

2006; Nunnaly and Bernstein, 1994). Support for convergent validity is provided by examining

the average variance extracted (AVE) (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The AVE represents the

amount of common variance among latent construct indicators (Hair et al., 2006). In order to

achieve adequate convergent validity, the AVE should exceed 0.5 (i.e., for a construct, more than

half of the variance is explained by the scale items) (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Netemeyer et al.,

2003).

Evidence for discriminant validity is indicated when item loadings on the corresponding

construct are higher than their cross-loadings on other constructs in a factor analysis, and the

average variance shared between each construct and its indicators is greater than the variance

shared between the construct and other constructs in the model (Fornell, 1987). While the former

is determined by the size, sign, and significance of the factor loadings, the latter is ascertained if

the AVE is greater than the square of the correlation between the construct and every other

construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Fornell, 1987). In this study, confirmatory factor analysis

was conducted using structural equation modeling to establish these construct validity of the

scales.
 67

3.6 Statistical Analyses

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypothetical relationships

among the constructs using the EQS (Bentler, 1995). SEM has substantial advantages over

traditional approaches, because it is the only multivariate technique that enables one to

simultaneously estimate multiple equations (Hair et al., 2006). These equations represent the

relationships between latent constructs and their multiple indicators (i.e., the measurement

model) as well as the relationships between such constructs (i.e., the structural model) (Hair et al.,

2006). Based on this property, SEM allows for the testing of measurement characteristics of each

construct, including convergent and discriminant validity, as well as the hypothesized

relationships among the constructs (Joreskog and Sorbom, 1989; Novak, Hoffman, and Yung,

2000). Additionally, SEM is capable of testing moderation or interaction effects among

constructs, which relate to the main purpose of this research (Li et al., 1998; Rigdon, 1998).

The model analysis followed the two-step approach proposed by Anderson and Gerbing

(1988). In the first step, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to ensure that the

corresponding CFA models attain acceptable levels of goodness of fit and that constructs in the

models indicate sufficient reliability and validity. In this process, constructs in the models were

assessed in terms of reliability and validity based on the criteria discussed above, while the

purification of the measurement models was also done in case model fit was not good enough. In

the second step, the structural models were tested by examining path coefficients, which indicate

the strength and the sign of the theoretical relationships. In addition to these parameters, t-

statistics were used to test the research hypotheses. For model estimation, robust maximum

likelihood (robust ML) method was employed to address lack of multivariate normality (Bentler,

1995; Mardia, 1970).

 68

The overall adequacy of the proposed model was assessed based on several overall fit

measures. Because of the model estimation method (i.e., robust ML), the following measures

were adopted: 1) the normed fit index (NFI); 2) the non-normed fit index (NNFI) (Bentler and

Bonett, 1980); 3) the incremental fit index (IFI) (Bollen, 1989); and 4) the comparative fit index

(CFI) (Bentler, 1990). For these goodness of fit indices, values greater than 0.90 indicate an

acceptable level of fit (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; Hair et al., 2006). Also, the Chi-square (2)

measure of goodness-of-fit was used to compare models. A non-significant Chi-square suggests

the correlation matrix computed based on the proposed model is not significantly different from

the correlation matrix derived from the actual data. In addition, the root mean square error of

approximation (RMSEA) was examined. Regarding these indices, values of 0.08 or less indicate

an excellent fit (Baumgartner and Homburg, 1996; Hair et al., 2006).

Because measures for independent and dependent variables come from the same source,

it is acknowledged that common method variance may inflate the observed relationships between

the constructs. To address the concern, a post-hoc test of common method variance was executed.

The structural model was re-estimated with a same-source first-order factor, which is added to

the indicators of all latent constructs in the model (Podsakoff et al., 2003). This procedure

controls the portion of the variance in the indicators that results from measuring items from the

same source. Also, the data set was examined beforehand in several ways: 1) no missing data

points were found; 2) deletions of cases were made based on a screening question (Appendix B)

and on examinations of univariate outliers (standardized values and box plot) as well as

multivariate outliers (mahalanobis distance); and 3) concerns of violations of normality

assumption were addressed by applying robust maximum likelihood estimation method in the

statistical analyses.
 69

The model used in the empirical analysis was developed for each of ideal and actual self-

congruity in order to conceptually differentiate their distinctive psychological mechanism in the

formation of brand attachment (Figure 3.1). Each model includes brand experience, self-

congruity (ideal/actual), the interaction term of these constructs, and emotional brand attachment

as well as its two outcomes (i.e., willingness to pay a brand premium and positive word of

mouth). The interaction term was incorporated in the structural models to test the interaction

effects of brand experience and self-congruity, following Pings (2007) approach that was

developed to specifically test an interaction moderation effect between a second order construct

and a first order construct. Furthermore, specifically focusing the proposed interaction effects,

ANOVA was also used to analyze the interaction patterns in order to interpret the results in more

detail and confirm the robustness of the findings using a different statistical analysis.
 70

Model 1: Model to test the effects of Ideal Self-Congruity (ISC Model)

Brand Experience
Willingness to Pay a
(BE)
Brand Premium

H3 (WTP)
H6

BE ISC Emotional Brand

H4
Interaction Attachment
(BA)
H7
Positive Word of
H1 Mouth (WOM)
Ideal Self-
Congruity (ISC)

Model 2: Model to test the effects of Actual Self-Congruity (ASC Model)

Brand Experience
(BE) Willingness to Pay a
Brand Premium
H3 (WTP)
H6

BE ASC Emotional Brand

H5
Interaction Attachment
(BA)
H7
Positive Word of
H2
Actual Self- Mouth (WOM)
Congruity (ASC)

Figure 3.1. Hypothesis Testing Models for Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
 71

CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1 Overview

This chapter presents results of the pretest and the main study, and is divided into four

parts. The first section reports the results of the data collection and data analyses of the pretest.

Next, the results of the main study and the process of data collection are presented. Following

this, reports regarding the measurement models and psychometric properties of the constructs

used in this study will be offered. Finally, results of statistical analysis of the structural model for

the hypothesis testing will be presented.

4.2 Pretest: Selection of Focal Brands

The pretest consisted of two phases: 1) examining the appropriateness of smartphones as

the target product category; and 2) selecting the focal brands within the product category.

In the first phase, the product category was examined with regards to the two conditions

discussed in the previous chapter: a non fast-moving consumer goods (non-FMCG) and publicly

consumed product category. In order to verify that smartphones as a product category fit these

conditions, a series of data analyses were conducted with other product categories that may also

satisfy the two conditions. Based on the literature review discussed the previous chapter, the

following six product categories were chosen for this purpose: laptops, tablets, MP3, sport shoes,

jeans, and cars.

For the second objective, several major smartphone brands were examined to choose the

focal brands that are highly recognized among consumers. Seven major brands (Apple, Samsung,

BlackBerry, HTC, Motorola, Nokia, and Sony Ericsson) were chosen as the candidate brands,
 72

based on a review of actual market information and brand literature (e.g., Nielsen 2012; Cheng et

al., 2012; Laran et al., 2011). In the data analysis, brand awareness was used as the main

criterion to select the focal brands and brand familiarity was applied as a supplemental criterion

to screen out such brands that consumers are considerably less familiar with than other brands.

4.2.1 Data Collection

With permission of the course instructor (and also, Human Subjects Committee's

approval), college students were recruited from a large section of an undergraduate marketing

course in a large Midwestern U.S. university. Three announcements were made during regular

class hours to invite them to the participation in exchange for extra credit for the course grades.

Fliers were also distributed in the class room in order to encourage participation. Subsequently,

students were contacted by the researcher via e-mails that include a cover latter and the link to

the online survey. The survey instrument was administered using Qualtrics over the Internet.

Participants were allowed five days to complete the survey. The questionnaire consists of cover

letter, scale items, and demographic questions.

107 respondents completed the survey within the specified period and none of the

responses includes missing values. Accordingly, all the responses were considered valid

responses and retained for the subsequent data analysis. Details of the sample characteristics are

presented in Table 4.1.

4.2.2 Results

Appropriateness of Smartphone as the Target Product Category. The results indicated

that smartphones as a product category is a publicly consumed product and also a non-fast-

moving consumption goods (non-FMCG), and therefore, satisfies the conditions of the target

product category examined in this pretest.

 73

Table 4.1
Pretest Data Sample Characteristics

Characteristics Percentage of All Respondents

Age (mean = 23.21; S.D. = 4.49)

18 24 years old 79.4 % (n = 85)

25 34 years old 15.9 % (n = 17)
35 44 years old 3.8 % (n = 4)
45 54 years old 0.9 % (n = 1)
Gender

Male 62.6 % (n = 67)

Female 37.4 % (n = 40)
Ethnicity

Caucasian 68.2 % (n = 73)

African American 16.8 % (n = 18)
Hispanic 3.7 % (n = 4)
Asian/Pacific Islander 8.4 % (n = 9)
Middle Eastern 0.9 % (n = 1)
Other 1.9 % (n = 2)
Household Income

< $ 25,000 43.9 % (n = 47)

$ 25,000 - $49,999 18.7 % (n = 20)
$50,000 - $74,999 12.1 % (n = 13)
$75,000 - $99,000 13.1 % (n = 14)
> $100,000 12.1 % (n = 13)

First, in publicly and privately consumed product scale item (7-point scale), which

intends to measure the extent to which consumers consider a product category a publicly

consumed product (i.e., socially visible when it is used), smartphones had the highest mean score

(6.40) among the seven categories (Table 4.2). This result clearly shows that smartphones do

indeed represent publicly consumed product categories. Second, regarding expected period of

use, it was found that respondents, on average, expect a smartphone to be in service for

approximately 2 years before replacing it (mean = 23.82 months) (Table 4.2). Thus, the result
 74

indicates that smartphones as a product category can also represent non-FMCG, whose expected

period of use is supposed to be longer than 12 months.

Overall, the above results indicate that smartphones as a product category is considered

appropriate for this study, satisfying both of the two conditions examined here.

Table 4.2
Public/Private Consumption and Expected Period of Use

Sport
Laptops Tablets MP3 Smartphones Jeans Cars
shoes

Public/Private
Consumption 5.54 5.19 5.79 6.4 5.77 5.94 6.36
Product (1.586) (1.518) (1.671) (1.228) (1.384) (1.491) (1.216)
Category scale

Expected Period 41.30 34.78 41.19 23.82 13.89 21.70 87.68

of Use (months) (23.47) (26.02) (27.94) (14.33) (9.92) (19.88) (56.10)

*Mean scores and standard deviations (in parentheses)

Selection of the Focal Brands. The brand awareness (5 items, 1: strongly disagree 7:

strongly agree) scale was used as the main criterion to select the focal brands from the 7

candidate brands mentioned above. Mean scores of the 5 items were calculated to examine brand

awareness of these brands (Table 4.3). A mean score of 5.0 was considered as the cutoff point at

first. Three major brands (Apple, BlackBerry, and Sumsung) exceeded this criterion. Meanwhile,

although the mean scores of two other major brands (HTC and Motorola) were slightly below

this cutoff point, both of them exceeded 4.75, which is equivalent to 3.5 point in 5 point scale a

cutoff point that has been used in the previous literature (e.g., Malar et al., 2011). Including these
 75

two brands makes it possible for the current study to cover approximately 90% of U.S.

smartphone market (Nielsen, 2012a). By doing so, this study can be expected to attain a

considerably higher degree of generalizability in the entire market of this category than limiting

to the top three brands. For these reasons, HTC and Motorola were retained. Finally, the other

two brands, NOKIA and SonyEricsson, were dropped from the study because both clearly failed

to satisfy the criterion.

In addition, brand familiarity scale (3 items, 1: strongly disagree 7: strongly agree) was

supplementally used to eliminate such brands that are considerably less familiar than other major

brands, although brand familiarity is not the scope of the current study. Mean scores were

calculated to examine brand familiarity, also here. NOKIA and SonyEricsson were found to be

considerably less familiar than the other brands, being the only brands that fell below 3.0, so they

were eliminated from consideration again. On the other hand, Apple was found to be the most

familiar brand, attaining a higher brand familiarity (5.74) than any other. As to the other four

brands, brand familiarity did not vary considerably and concentrated within a limited interval

ranging from 3.63 (BlackBerry) to 4.22 (Samsung), where HTC (3.97) and Motorola (3.79)

Table 4.3
Brand Awareness and Brand Familiarity

Apple BlackBerry Samsung HTC Motorola NOKIA Sony

Ericsson
Brand 6.59 5.03 5.13 4.77 4.94 3.81 2.99
Awareness
(0.60) (1.50) (1.46) (1.85) (1.65) (1.76) (1.63)
scale

Brand 5.74 3.63 4.22 3.97 3.79 2.81 2.33

Familiarity (1.38) (1.86) (1.90) (2.13) (1.87) (1.72) (1.50)
scale

*Mean scores and standard deviations (in parentheses)

 76

indicated higher familiarity than the third top awareness brand, BlackBerry. Considering that it is

not realistic to expect the respondents as a group to be highly familiar with multiple major brands,

this range of familiarity seems acceptable for the current study. Accordingly, along with the

consideration discussed above regarding market share and generalizability of the results, these

four brands, as well as Apple, were retained.

As a result of these considerations, five major smartphone brands Apple, Samsung,

BlackBerry, HTC, and Motorola were selected as the focal brands used in the main study of

this dissertation.

4.3 Main Study

In the pretest, the focal brands used in the main study were selected. As proposed in

Chapter 3, the main study was used to test the proposed hypotheses regarding self-congruity,

brand experience, and brand attachment as well as the outcomes, such as willingness to pay a

price premium and positive word of mouth. In order to achieve greater generalizability of the

findings, U.S. consumers in general were targeted as the population. Thus, a non-student sample

recruited online was used for this study. In the following sections, a short report of the data

collection process is offered. Following that, the measurement model will be discussed and

reports regarding the psychometric properties of the constructs used in the hypothesis testing will

be offered. Finally, results from the structural model testing will be presented.

4.3.1 Data Collection

Participants in the main study were U.S. residents who were active members of

Amazon.coms Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Mechanical Turk is an Internet survey solution

provider that can offer customized online panels for a variety of research purposes, and has

recently become popular among social scientists as a source of data (Paolacci et al., 2010).
 77

Participants were recruited on the website, and offered 50 cents as a compensation for their time.

In the recruitment process, Mechanical Turk was instructed to limit the participants not only to

U.S. residents based on registration records, but also to focus on those who have offered good

quality of data in past participations (95% or more in approval rate).

The survey instrument was administered online using Qualtrics survey software.

Participants were directed to the online questionnaire through the link contained in the cover

letter presented on Mechanical Turk website (see Appendix B for survey instrument). When they

accessed the Qualtrics website, a questionnaire for one of the five brands chosen in the pretest

was randomly assigned to each participant. The corresponding brand logo was continuously

presented at the top left of the screen with each set of questions concerning the brand. The entire

data collection process was completed within a four day period. After the survey was closed,

participant IDs (as a registered member of Mechanical Turk) were checked to confirm that there

were no multiple trials by the same individuals.

A total of 397 participants completed the survey. Participants were generally Caucasian

(78.1%), less than 35 years old (65.3%), and with household incomes less than $50,000 (59%),

and thus appear to fairly well represent the U.S. smartphone market. Moreover, the respondent

profile overlaps considerably with that of the student sample in the pretest. Detailed sample

characteristics are listed in Table 4.4. No missing data points were found. The data were

screened based on the considerations discussed in Chapter 3. As a result, 44 responses were

removed and 353 valid responses were retained for further analyses. The possibility of common

method bias was also examined by referring Podsakoff et al. (2003). Factor loadings of all

constructs used in the model testing were compared between a confirmatory factor analysis

(CFA) model with a common latent factor and another CFA model without common latent factor.
 78

No substantial differences in factor loadings were found (< 0.055), which suggests that serious

common method bias was not detected.

Table 4.4
Main Study Data Sample Characteristics

Characteristics Percentage of All Respondents

Age (mean = 33.28; S.D. = 12.65)
18 24 years old 30.0 % (n = 119)
25 34 years old 35.3 % (n = 140)
35 44 years old 16.4 % (n = 65)
45 54 years old 8.6 % (n = 34)
55 64 years old 6.8 % (n = 27)
> 65 years old 3.0 % (n = 12)
Gender
Male 49.4 % (n = 196)
Female 50.6 % (n = 201)
Ethnicity
Caucasian 78.1 % (n = 310)
African American 5.3 % (n = 21)
Hispanic 6.5 % (n = 26)
Asian/Pacific Islander 7.8 % (n = 31)
Native American 1.0 % (n = 4)
Middle Eastern 0.3 % (n = 1)
Other 1.0 % (n = 4)
Education
Less than high school 1.5 % (n = 6)
High school (or equivalent) 13.1 % (n = 52)
Some college 43.4 % (n = 172)
Bachelors degree 33.8 % (n = 134)
Masters degree 6.5 % (n = 26)
Doctoral degree (Ph.D.) or 1.8 % (n = 7)
professional degree (J.D., M.D., etc.)
Household Income
< $ 25,000 25.2 % (n = 100)
$ 25,000 - $49,999 33.8 % (n = 134)
$50,000 - $74,999 20.9 % (n = 83)
$75,000 - $99,000 9.1 % (n = 36)
> $100,000 11.1 % (n = 44)
 79

4.3.2 Assessment of the Measurement Models

Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Brand Experience scale. Regarding the brand

experience (BE) scale, which is the only multidimensional scale used in this study, a series of

confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were applied mainly for two reasons: 1) primarily to test the

measurement theory that specifies the pattern of factor loadings by examining how well such a

specification represents the actual data (Hair et al., 2005); and 2) to create a better measurement

model by eliminating items that were not fit well. From the purified scale, psychometric

properties were examined to verify construct validity and reliability as well as dimensionality.

The CFAs were performed using EQS 6.1 (Bentler, 1994). The base model of CFA

included four dimensions of brand experience as latent factors and the original 5 indicators

(observed values for the scale items) for each dimension. All 4 dimensions were allowed to

correlate freely as suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). In the initial model estimation, it

was revealed that the Mardias coefficient, a measurement of multivariate kurtosis (Mardia,

1970), was greater than the recommended value of 3 ( = 42.39). The coefficient indicated the

lack of multivariate normality. Accordingly, in order to address the concern regarding the

violation of multivariate normality assumption, robust maximum likelihood (robust ML)

estimation was used in the subsequent CFAs, following Bentlers (1995) recommendation. As

expected, the measurement model provided a reasonably good fit with the data (comparative fit

index [CFI] = 0.984, non-normed fit index [NNFI] = 0.981, normed fit index [NFI] = 0.975,

Bollen fit index [IFI] = 0.981, root mean-square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.067).

Meanwhile, the results of the Lagrange Multiplier (ML) tests (Bentler and Dijkstra, 1985), which

was used to identify the variables that loaded on multiple latent factors, suggested the possibility

of further improvement of the model fit. Accordingly, a series of model modifications were made,
 80

as presented in Table 4.5. Two items were removed in the process and the final measurement

model attained an excellent fit (CFI = 0.994, NNFI = 0.992, NFI = 0.985, IFI = 0.994, RMSEA =

0.045 (95%CI: 0.034 0.055)). Although the chi-square was significant (Satorra-Bentler 2 (df

=125) = 213.67, p<0.001), it is known to be highly sensitive to sample size and this is to be

expected with larger datasets (Bollen, 1989; Byrne, 1994). In this model, each item was found to

load highly on its corresponding factor (> 0.906).

Table 4.5

Purification Process of the Measurement Model Brand Experience

Purification LV from which

S-B 2 (df) NNFI NFI IFI CFI RMSEA item was
Steps
removed

Base Model 414.72 (160) 0.981 0.975 0.981 0.984 0.067

IBE2
293.76 (142) 0.988 0.981 0.990 0.990 0.055 Intellectual BE
dropped
IBE1
213.67 (125) 0.992 0.985 0.994 0.994 0.045 Intellectual BE
dropped

Based on this final measurement model, reliability and validity of brand experience

construct were examined. First, the composite reliability and coefficient alpha (Chronbach, 1951)

were calculated in order to check the internal consistency of the four dimensions of the BE

construct. As shown in Table 4.6, the composite reliabilities were all above 0.70 of the

recommended threshold for adequate reliability (Hair et al., 2005; Bagozzi and Yi, 1988), and

Chronbachs alpha also met the minimum requirement of 0.7 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988; Netemeyer

et al., 2003), providing support of construct reliability.

 81

Subsequently, convergent and discriminant validity were examined based on the

procedures established by Fornell and Larcker (1981). In order to verify convergent validity,

average variance extracted (AVE) was calculated for each dimension using the respective

standardized loadings. Convergent validity is supported if AVE values are greater than 0.5

(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The AVEs of all four factors of Brand Experience exceeded the

threshold, exhibiting the evidence of convergent validity (Table 4.6). Following this,

discriminant validity was scrutinized. Discriminant validity is established if an AVE is greater

than square correlation between the construct and all the other constructs in the model (Fornell

and Larcker, 1981). The matrix below shows the results of the calculations (Table 4.7). The

square root of AVE for each construct (i.e., dimension) is on the diagonal, while the correlations

between the constructs are on off the diagonal. The matrix indicates that the AVEs are greater

than the squared correlations, and therefore, the evidence of discriminant validity was provided.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis: All the Constructs used in the Structural Model Testing.

Following brand experience scale, the measurement model of all the constructs used to test the

hypotheses was assessed by performing confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), following the two-

step approach by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). The primary objective of the CFAs is to test

construct reliability and validity as well as dimensionality, in order to verify that all six

constructs can be identified as unique constructs, so that the structural models can be established

to test the hypotheses. The secondary purpose of the CFAs is to obtain a better fit of the

measurement model through scale purification. The initial estimation revealed that the data

violated the assumption of multivariate normality (Mardias coefficient: = 63.11). Accordingly,

robust maximum likelihood (robust ML) estimation was employed again. The measurement

model (Figure 4.2) exhibited an excellent fit to the data in the first run (Satorra-Bentler 2 =
 82

Table 4.6

Reliability Measures and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Brand Experience

Factors Chronbachs Alpha Composite Reliability AVE

IBE 0.970 0.971 0.917

SBE 0.981 0.981 0.911

ABE 0.985 0.985 0.931

BBE 0.967 0.967 0.855

Table 4.7

Factor Correlation Matrix with square root of AVE (on diagonal) Brand Experience

IBE SBE ABE ABE

IBE 0.957

SBE 0.847 0.954

ABE 0.865 0.901 0.965

BBE 0.854 0.794 0.824 0.924

 83

1076.33 (df = 673, p<0.001), CFI = 0.986, NNFI = 0.985, NFI = 0.964, IFI = 0.986, RMSEA =

0.041 (95%CI: 0.037 0.046). Accordingly, no further attempt to improve model fit was made.

Each of the factor loadings on the corresponding constructs exceeded 0.9, except BA5 (0.653).

Based on this measurement model, reliability and validity were examined as to the six

constructs. For all of them, Chronbachs alpha exceeded the cutoff point (0.7) and composite

reliabilities were also well above the threshold of 0.7 (Table 4.8). Thus, construct reliability was

supported. Next, AVEs were calculated in order to verify construct validity. The AVEs of the

six constructs were all greater than 0.5 of threshold, and therefore, the evidence of convergent

validity of these constructs was established. With regards to discriminant validity, as presented in

the matrix below (Table 4.9), each of the AVEs exceeded the square of the correlations between

the corresponding construct and all the other constructs without exception. Accordingly, solid

evidence was provided for discriminant validity concerning the six constructs. Thus, construct

reliability and validity were established for all the constructs used in the subsequent hypothesis

testing.

4.3.3 Structural Model Analysis and Hypothesis Testing

4.3.3.1 Ideal Self-Congruity (ISC) Model

By establishing the structural model that specifically focuses on the interaction effect

between ideal self-congruity and brand experience on brand attachment (ISC Model, see Figure

4.1), a structural equation modeling (SEM) was executed to test the proposed hypotheses. EQS

6.1 was used for the model estimation. The proposed interaction effect was tested following

Ping's (2007) approach that was developed specifically to test an interaction effect between a

second order construct and a first order construct. Mardias coefficient (= 57.65) suggested

violation of normality assumption. Accordingly, robust maximum likelihood (robust ML)

 84

Table 4.8
Reliability Measures and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) 6 constructs

Factors Chronbachs Alpha Composite Reliability AVE

ASC 0.984 0.984 0.926

BA 0.952 0.959 0.827

ISC 0.987 0.987 0.938

WTP 0.993 0.993 0.979

WOM 0.973 0.974 0.926

BE 0.957 0.846

Table 4.9
Factor Correlation Matrix with square root of AVE (on diagonal) 6 constructs

Factors ASC BA ISC WTP WOM BE

ASC 0.962

BA 0.606 0.909

ISC 0.879 0.597 0.969

WTP 0.688 0.654 0.752 0.990

WOM 0.755 0.609 0.799 0.842 0.962

BE 0.764 0.670 0.813 0.757 0.835 0.920

 85

method was employed to estimate the model fit. The hypothesized structural model exhibited a

good fit to the data (Satorra-Bentler 2 = 1308.90 (df = 643, p<0.001), CFI = 0.972, NNFI =

0.970, NFI = 0.947, IFI = 0.972, RMSEA = 0.054 (95%CI: 0.050 0.058).

Regarding H1, which stipulates the positive relationship between ideal self-congruity and

brand attachment, the relationship was found to be positive and statistically significant at 0.01

level (= 0.229, t = 3.193, p < 0.01). Thus, the results supported H1 and confirmed a positive

effect of ideal self-congruity on brand attachment. Also, the results confirmed the positive effect

of brand experience on brand attachment. The relationship was positive and statistically

significant at 0.01 level (= 0.542, t = 5.125, p < 0.01), in support of H3. Furthermore, H4,

which predicted the interaction effect between ideal self-congruity and brand experience on

brand attachment, was supported. The relationship was positive and statistically significant at

0.01 level (= 0.293, t = 5.197, p < 0.01). Thus, it was confirmed that ideal self-congruity leads

to stronger brand attachment when brand experience is higher, as was further discussed also

below.

With regards to the two outcomes, willingness to pay a brand premium and positive word

of mouth, the results confirmed the positive effects of brand attachment on them. First, H6,

which posits the positive effect of brand attachment on willingness to pay a brand premium, was

supported. The relationship was positive and statistically significant at 0.01 level (= 0.671, t =

3.678, p < 0.01), in support of H6. Also, H7, which predicted a positive effect of brand

attachment on positive word-of-mouth, was supported. The relationship was positive and

statistically significant at 0.01 level (= 0.626, t = 5.334, p < 0.01).

In order to further examine the results, and specifically focusing on the interaction effect,

an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was executed. The primary objective of this was to analyze
 86

Brand
Experience
(BE)

Willingness to Pay a
= 0.542*** Brand Premium
(WTP)

= 0.671***

BE ISC = 0.293*** Brand

Interaction Attachment
(BA)
= 0.626***

Positive Word of
= 0.229** Mouth
(WOM)

Ideal Self-
Congruity
(ISC)

* Denotes significant at p < 0.05; ** Denotes significant at p < 0.01; *** Denotes significant at p < 0.001

Figure 4.1. Results of Hypothesis Testing (SEM): ISC Model

 87

the pattern of the interaction effect using a graphical representation that is strictly based on the

corresponding statistical analysis, in order to confirm the correctness of the interpretation of the

effect discussed above. The second goal is to test the robustness of the findings using a different

methodology for examining the effect. For the purposes, a factorial 2 X 2 ANOVA was

performed with brand attachment as the dependent variable and ideal self-congruity and brand

experience as the independent variables. In order to accomplish this, the cases were split into

groups at the median of the two independent variables that were calculated as the sum of the

reported scores. Specifically for brand experience, the items that were eliminated in the

aforementioned CFAs were removed first, and then the average scores for the retained items of

each dimension were summed so that each dimension would not be unequally weighted. As a

result, 4 groups were formed based on the following classifications - high and low levels of ideal

self-congruity and high and low levels of brand experience. Meanwhile, brand attachment was

also reduced to a single measure by averaging the observed scores of its five items.

Results of the ANOVA corroberated the conclusions of the SEM analysis discussed

above. The analysis detected the positive direct effect of ideal self-congruity (F (1,349) = 23.533, p

< 0.001) as well as that of brand experience (F (1,349) = 73.429, p < 0.001) on brand attachment.

Also, the significant interaction between ideal self-congruity and brand experience (F (1,349) =

9.844, p = 0.002) was revealed from the results. The interaction plot based on the group means

(Figure 4.2) estimated by the analysis clearly confirmed the interpretation that supports the

proposed interaction effect.

4.3.3.2 Actual Self-Congruity (ASC) Model

Following the hypothesis testing using ISC Model, the structural model that
 88

3.631
(High ISC & High BE)

2.320
(Low ISC & High BE) 1.710
(High ISC & Low BE)

1.428
(Low IC & Low BE)

Figure 4.2. ISC X BE Interaction Plot and Estimated Group Means of BA

mainly conceptualized the interaction effect between actual self-congruity and brand experience

(ASC Model, see Figure 4.3) was also tested by a structural equation modeling (SEM). EQS 6.1

was used for model estimation. Pings (2007) approach was followed to test the proposed

interaction effect here again. Mardias coefficient (= 55.77) indicated violation of normality

assumption again. Therefore, robust maximum likelihood (robust ML) method was applied. The

model obtained a good fit to the data (Satorra-Bentler 2 = 1380.43 (df = 643, p<0.001), CFI =

0.968, NNFI = 0.965, NFI = 0.942, IFI = 0.968, RMSEA = 0.057 (95%CI: 0.053 0.061).
 89

Brand
Experience
(BE)

Willingness to Pay a
= 0.542*** Brand Premium
(WTP)

= 0.671***

BE ASC = 0.304*** Brand

Interaction Attachment
(BA)
= 0.626***

Positive Word of
= 0.235***
Mouth
(WOM)

Actual Self-
Congruity
(ASC)

* Denotes significant at p < 0.05; ** Denotes significant at p < 0.01; *** Denotes significant at p < 0.001

Figure 4.3. Results of Hypothesis Testing (SEM): ASC Model

 90

First, H2, which stipulates a positive relationship between actual self-congruity and brand

attachment, the relationship was supported. The relationship was positive and statistically

significant at 0.01 level (= 0.235, t = 3.627, p < 0.01), in support of H2. Next, the results again

confirmed the positive effect of brand experience on brand attachment also in this Model. The

relationship was positive and statistically significant at 0.01 level (= 0.542, t = 5.049, p < 0.01),

in support of H3. Still, H5, which posits the interaction effect between actual self-congruity and

brand experience on brand attachment, was supported. The relationship was positive and

statistically significant at 0.01 level (= 0.304, t = 5.086, p < 0.01), supporting H5. Thus,

similar to the interaction effect as to ideal self-congruity, it was revealed that actual self-

congruity leads to stronger brand attachment when brand experience is higher. This finding was

further examined below, in the same way as was done regarding ideal self-congruity. The results

again verified the two hypotheses regarding the outcome of brand attachment in ASC Model as

well. First, H6 was supported. The relationship was positive and statistically significant at 0.01

level (= 0.671, t = 4.257, p < 0.01). Thus, the results confirmed the positive effect of brand

attachment on willingness to pay a brand premium. H7 was also supported. The relationship was

found to be positive and statistically significant at 0.01 level (= 0.626, t = 20.031, p < 0.01).

Accordingly, the results confirmed the positive effect of brand attachment on positive word-of-

mouth.

In the same way as for the ISC Model, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted

to specifically focus on the interaction effect tested in the ASC Model. The interaction plot based

on the group means (Figure 4.4) estimated by the analysis clearly confirmed the interpretation

that supports the proposed interaction effect, again.

 91

The analysis found a significant positive direct effect of actual self-congruity (F (1,349) =

16.700, p < 0.001), as well as that of brand experience (F (1,349) = 88.903, p < 0.001) on brand

attachment. Also, the significant interaction between actual self-congruity and brand experience

(F (1,349) = 8.024, p = 0.005) was verified by the results.

3.569
(High ASC & High BE)

2.474
(Low ASC & High BE)
1.628
(High ASC & Low BE)

1.429
(Low ASC & Low BE)

Figure 4.4. ASC X BE Interaction Plot and Estimated Group Means of BA

 92

Table 4.10

Summary of Results in Hypothesis

Testing
Path
Research Hypothesis t-value Finding
Coefficient
(p < 0.01)
()

H1: Ideal self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on

0.229 3.193 Supported
emotional brand attachment.

H2: Actual self-congruity has a direct and positive effect

0.235 3.627 Supported
on emotional brand attachment.

H3: Brand experience has a direct and positive effect on 0.542 5.125
emotional brand attachment.
(Upper raw: Results in ISC Model; Lower raw: Results in Supported
ASC Model) 0.542 5.049

H4: The interaction between ideal self-congruity and

brand experience has a positive effect on emotional brand
attachment, such that the direct positive effect of ideal 0.293 5.197 Supported
self-congruity on emotional brand attachment is
significantly greater when brand experience is high than
when brand experience is low.

H5: The interaction between actual self-congruity and

brand experience has a positive effect on emotional brand
attachment, such that the direct positive effect of actual 0.304 5.086 Supported
self-congruity on emotional brand attachment is
significantly greater when brand experience is high than
when brand experience is low.

H6: Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive 0.671 3.678
effect on willingness to pay a brand premium (WTP).
(Upper raw: Results in ISC Model; Lower raw: Results in Supported
ASC Model) 0.671 4.257

H7: Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive 0.626 5.334
effect on positive word of mouth (WOM).
(Upper raw: Results in ISC Model; Lower raw: Results in Supported
ASC Model) 0.626 20.031
 93

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Overview

This chapter presents a summary of the previous chapters and discusses the implications

of the study, and is divided into two parts. The first section summarizes the background,

hypotheses, methodology, and findings of the study. In the next section, implications of the

findings and theoretical contributions as well as managerial implications of the study will be

discussed. Limitations of this study and directions of future research will be also presented.

Finally, the conclusion of this study will be stated briefly.

5.2 Summary of the Study

5.2.1 Summary of Background Literature and Purpose of the Study

Marketing researchers have studied such a phenomenon that people buy brands as a

means of expressing themselves, from the perspective of self-congruity (Sirgy, 1982, Aaker,

1999). They postulate that a fit between a consumers self-image and a brands image should

drive the consumers purchase behavior. This stream of research has explored the relations

between self-brand image congruity and various behavioral outcomes (e.g., Sirgy, 1985;

Kressman et al, 2006; Malar et al., 2011). However, this research stream has not succeeded in

finding clear and strong evidence of the assumed effects on such a vital outcome as emotional

brand attachment, although emotional brand attachment (Thomson et al., 2005) has attracted

considerable attention in recent years because it is considered a critical determinant of brand

loyalty (e.g., Grisaffe and Nguyen, 2011; Swaminathan et al., 2009) as well as a better predictor

of purchase intention than brand attitude (e.g., Park et al., 2010). In order to shed light on this
 94

little understood relationship, this research proposed that brand experience (Brakus et al., 2009)

interacts with self-congruity, determining the intensity of the subsequent emotional brand

commitment. Along with the main proposition, individual effects of self-congruity and brand

experience on emotional brand attachment and its effects on the subsequent outcomes such as

willingness to pay a brand premium and likelihood of positive word of mouth were also

examined. Thus, the following research questions were established in this study.

1. Does (ideal or actual) self-congruity affect emotional brand attachment?

2. Does brand experience affect emotional brand attachment?

3. Do (ideal or actual) self-congruity and brand experience jointly affect emotional brand

attachment?

4. Does emotional brand attachment affect willingness to pay a brand premium and

likelihood of positive word of mouth?

5.2.2 Summary of Methodology

5.2.2.1 Hypotheses

In order to examine the above research questions, the following hypotheses were

developed on the basis of the well grounded literature regarding self-concept, self-congruity, and

self-expansion theory, as well as the latest findings in rapidly growing fields such as experiential

marketing and goal-directed behavior or behavioral priming.

H1: Ideal self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand attachment.

H2: Actual self-congruity has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand attachment.

H3: Brand experience has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand attachment.

H4: The interaction between ideal self-congruity and brand experience has a positive

effect on emotional brand attachment, such that the direct positive effect of ideal self-
 95

congruity on emotional brand attachment is significantly greater when brand experience

is high than when brand experience is low.

H5: The interaction between actual self-congruity and brand experience has a positive

effect on emotional brand attachment, such that the direct positive effect of actual self-

congruity on emotional brand attachment is significantly greater when brand experience

is high than when brand experience is low.

H6: Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on willingness to pay a

brand premium (WTP).

H7: Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on positive word of

mouth (WOM).

5.2.2.2 Research Methodology

Data were collected from 397 U.S. residents who are active members of Amazons

Mechanical Turk. A questionnaire was used to collect data from respondents with regards to the

5 focal smartphone brands. A pretest (n = 107) indicated that smartphones as a product category

was publicly consumed products and non-fast-moving consumption goods. Also, the results

revealed that the 5 focal brands obtained high brand awareness and relatively higher brand

familiarity among major smartphone brands. In the main survey, each respondent was asked to

answer the questionnaire concerning one of the 5 focal brands that was randomly assigned. All

theoretical constructs were operationalized using previously developed multi-item scales, some

of which were partly modified to fit the current context. The proposed models were examined

mainly using structural equation modeling (SEM) with EQS. The overall models were tested

based on a two-step structural equation modeling approach (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The

overall model fit was assessed using robust maximum likelihood estimation with multiple fit
 96

criteria. Also, additional analysis was conducted using analysis of variance (ANOVA), in order

to further focus on the proposed interaction effects.

5.2.3 Summary of Results

Overall, the results supported the hypothesized relationships. The results indicated that

both ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity positively and directly affect the intensity of

emotional brand attachment. Also, brand experience was found to positively and directly affect

the intensity of emotional brand attachment. Furthermore, the interaction effect between self-

congruity and brand experience was confirmed as expected. That is, for both ideal self-congruity

and actual self-congruity, it was revealed that the interaction between self-congruity and brand

experience positively affects emotional brand attachment, in such a way that self-congruity leads

to stronger brand attachment when brand experience is high than when it is low. In addition, the

results also suggested that brand experience has larger effects (= 0.542) on emotional brand

attachment than self-congruity (= 0.229; 0.235, for ideal self-congruity and actual self-

congruity, respectively), and that self-congruity may create still greater effects than its individual

effects by interacting with brand experience (= 0.293; 0.304, for ideal self-congruity and

actual self-congruity, respectively). Finally, with regards to the two outcomes, the results

indicated that emotional brand attachment has positive effects on both willingness to pay a brand

premium and likelihood of positive word-of-mouth.

5.3 Discussion

5.3.1 Implications of Findings

The first important finding is the positive effect of ideal self-congruity on emotional

brand attachment. The results are consistent with the notion that consumers are attracted to a
 97

brand that is congruent with their ideal self because such a brand facilitates a self-enhancement

process (Rogers, 1961; Higgins, 1987; Collins, 1996), which helps consumers enhance their self-

esteem or actual self-image and motivates them to interact with the brand, leading to strong self-

brand connections.

This relationship was not found in the previous study (Malar et al., 2011). The possible

explanations for this discrepancy can be partly sought in their methodology. In Malar et al.

(2011), the focal brands were chosen from among several Interbrand rankings (across various

product categories), based on their intention to choose such brands that are highly familiar with

respondents. Accordingly, only top or highly popular brands were selected, whose images were

likely to be favorable and congruent with their ideal self-image. This procedure might have

resulted in a less variability in responses on ideal-self congruity scale than would be required to

detect the proposed effect. Furthermore, among their focal brands, some might have been

perceived as being out of reach, and therefore, unreal, or not authentic. (p.46). In such special

cases, other factors than a high degree of ideal self-congruity (e.g., price ranges) would affect the

motivation to interact with the brand, and therefore, hamper researchers from detecting the

proposed effect of ideal self-congruity. By contrast, the current study addressed these issues by

specifying the target product category, in which products do not seem considerably different in

other factors than the brand itself (e.g., price ranges, functions), while also including such brands

that are not necessarily top or highly popular brands.

The second important finding is the positive effect of actual self-congruity on emotional

brand attachment. The results support the notion that consumers are motivated to focus on a

brand that is congruent with their actual self because such a brand motivates a self-verification

process (Lecky, 1945; Swann, Griffin,, Predmore, and Gaines, 1987; Swann, Stein-Seroussi, and
 98

Geisler, 1992), which leads consumers to psychological benefits such as warm feelings, relief or

self affirmation, forming strong attachment to the brand over time. Thus, the results suggest that

both ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity positively affect the intensity of emotional

brand attachment. Based on their results that indicated nonexistence of a general positive effect

of ideal self-congruity, Malar and her colleagues emphasized the importance of actual self-

congruity. The current results may compel us to reconsider such an emphasis and call on

recognizing the importance of both ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity in attaining

consumers strong attachment to a brand.

The third important finding is the positive effect of brand experience on emotional

brand attachment. The results are consistent with the prediction derived from the theory that was

developed in this study on the basis of the behavioral priming literature (e.g., Chartrand and

Bargh, 1996) and self-expansion theory (Aron and Aron, 1986). More specifically, they

supported the explanation that past interactions with a brand lead consumers to elicit intensive

positive psychological and behavioral responses (when the brand is associated with some goal or

desired states), and such positive responses motivate them to include the brand image into their

self-image through self-expansion processes. The existence of the direct effect of brand

experience on emotional brand attachment has the following important implication. That is,

positive responses to a brand or the related stimuli (i.e., brand experience) itself can lead to a

strong emotional attachment to a brand, regardless of its self-brand image congruity. This finding

seems to endorse the following psychological process described by self-expansion theory -

People seek to expand the self in the sense that they seek to enhance the physical and social

resources, .., that facilitate achievement of any goal that might arise (Aron, Aron, and

Norman, 2001, p.478). In other words, this statement suggests that people are motivated to
 99

expand the self by including resources (in the current context, a brand) as long as they feel that

the resources could help them achieve any goal, even when such a goal may not be relevant to

their ideal self-image or actual self-image. Still, the results suggested a considerably greater

direct effect of brand experience (= 0.542) on brand attachment than those of self-congruity

(= 0.229; 0.235, for ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity, respectively). Considering

these, the results may suggest that self-expansion motives play a much greater role than self-

congruity in the formation of emotional brand attachment.

The fourth and most important finding in the study is the interaction effects between self-

congruity and brand experience on emotional brand attachment. The results indicated that (ideal

and actual) self-congruity leads to a greater brand attachment when brand experience is high than

when it is low. In other words, it was observed that brand experience boosts the positive effects

of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment. This is consistent with the proposed interactive

process that, while self-congruity motivates a consumer to focus on the brand (through self-

enhancement motives or self-verification motives), when the brand stimuli activate the

corresponding part of the self-concept (i.e., ideal self-image or actual self-image) and elicit

strong positive responses (i.e., brand experience), such responses further motivate to interact

with the brand (also, led by self-expansion motives), resulting in a strong emotional attachment

to the brand. Through such interactive process, brand experience as strong positive responses are

considered to leverage the positive effects of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment.

Conversely, even when a brand is congruent with ideal or actual self-image, and therefore, the

consumer is initially motivated to focus on the brand, if the brand stimuli do not elicit strong

positive responses (i.e., brand experience is low), it is less likely that self-congruity leads to a

strong brand attachment, according to the results. Thus, the results support the proposed
 100

interactive process between self-congruity and brand experience in the formation of emotional

brand attachment.

In addition, the results suggested that the interaction may create still greater effects on

emotional brand attachment (= 0.293; 0.304, for ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity,

respectively) than direct effects of self-congruity (= 0.229; 0.235, for ideal self-congruity and

actual self-congruity, respectively). Considering the fact that direct effect of brand experience

may be also considerably larger than direct effects of self-congruity, the results as a whole may

suggest the necessity to put more emphasis on brand experience and self-expansion process in

explaining the formation of emotional brand attachment.

Finally, the current study found the positive effects of emotional brand attachment on the

two outcomes included in the models: willingness to pay a brand premium; and likelihood of

positive word of mouth. The results confirmed the past findings, supporting the explanation that

a consumers brand attachment results in the subsequent commitment to the brand, such as brand

supporting behaviors and financial investments.

5.3.2 Theoretical Contributions

The most notable contribution of this research should be derived from its synthesis of

multiple research streams that have drawn serious research interests and have been vigorously

studied especially for recent years in brand studies. This theoretical integration made it possible

for the current study to incorporate the factor of consumers experience into the study of brand

attachment in a comprehensive way. Furthermore, it also offered novel insights into self-

congruity literature that enabled the study to clearly capture the elusive effects of self-congruity,

which the previous research in brand attachment failed to.

 101

First, this research was the first study to examine the influence of consumers

comprehensive experiences with brands on the formation of emotional brand attachment. For this

purpose, the study introduced the concept of brand experience recently developed by Brakus et al.

(2009). Since emotional attachment develops over time, consumers past experiences with

brands should play a crucial role in the formation process. Nonetheless, not only do few studies

refer to this factor, but also those exceptions argue or examine solely usage experience (e.g.,

Fournier, 1998; Aaker, et al., 2004; Kressmann et al., 2006). Experience can be direct

interactions with brands or indirect interactions (Brakus et al., 2009). Brakus et al.s (2009)

brand experience is a comprehensive concept that encompasses indirect as well as direct

consumers experiences. By employing the concept first in the brand attachment research, the

current study conceptualized and empirically examined the impact of consumers past experience

on emotional brand attachment inclusively.

Next, in order to explicate how such experiences are accumulated and determine their

subsequent impacts, this research developed the first comprehensive theory in the brand

literature to explain the psychological processes. As mentioned above, the current study

employed the concept of brand experience to examine the impact of consumers past experience.

However, the literature in brand experience has not argued how the impact of experience is

determined. Meanwhile, the research streams in social psychology, such as goal-directed

perception (Janiszewski, 2008) or behavioral priming (Bargh et al., 1996) have recently begun to

intensively examine the psychological processes regarding how consumers interactions with

brands develop their responses to brand-related stimuli (e.g., Chartrand et al., 2008; Fitzsimons

et al., 2008; Ferraro et al., 2009). By taking advantage of this emerging stream and merging it
 102

into the brand experience literature, the current study proposed the first theoretical framework to

explain the developmental process of the impacts of brand experience.

Furthermore, on the way of explaining how such impacts of brand experience leads to the

formation of emotional brand attachment, this research offered a more detailed explanation based

on self-expansion theory than the previous research. The significant interest in emotional brand

attachment has been emerging for these years (e.g., Malar et al., 2011; Park et al., 2010;

Swaminathan et al., 2009; Thomson et al., 2005). The majority of researchers have referred to or

mentioned self-expansion theory (Aaron and Aaron, 1986) as the central mechanism of the

attachment formation, or at least part of the explanation (Malar et al., 2011; Park et al., 2010;

Fournier, 1998). However, little existing research has provided explanations that explicitly

describe the psychological process the theory details. The current study extensively discussed the

process and developed a systematic explanation to describe how self-expansion leads to

emotional attachment to brands by strictly following the original theory.

Finally, on the basis of these integrations, this research examined the effects of self-

congruity and its interaction effects with brand experience on emotional brand attachment. Malar

et al. (2011) first examined the effect of self-congruity on emotional brand attachment. However,

they failed to find a conclusive evidence of the positive effect of ideal self-congruity. Building

on their study, this research examined the same effect by carefully adjusting such factors that

may affect the ability to detect the effect, in the research procedures. And most importantly, on

the way to propose the main hypothesis of this study, the interaction effects between self-

congruity and brand experience on emotional brand attachment, a novel explanation was

developed as to how positive impacts of brand (i.e., brand experience) and self-congruity can
 103

interact and create the driving force toward stronger brand attachment, grounded on all the

theoretical integrations mentioned above.

Thus, the main theoretical contributions of the current study were brought by

synthesizing the recent achievements in various growing research streams which were closely

related but yet to be integrated. Through the integration, it was aimed to incorporate consumers

experience into brand attachment research and to clearly demonstrate the effects of self-

congruity. As a result, the empirical evidence strongly supported all the theoretical explanations

developed in this study.

5.3.3 Managerial Implications

This study also offers several important implications for marketing managers. First, the

results suggest brand personality and its congruity with a consumer's ideal self-image as well as

actual self-image is the key factor to attain their emotional attachment to the brand. As ways to

create strong emotional brand connection with consumers, some brands have used such messages

to communicate with consumers that the products will bring them closer to realizing an ideal

image. (for example, Nikes Jordan brand used Michael Jordan as its brand spokes person to stir

athletes ideal visions of themselves), while some other brands have appealed using more

realistic images (for example, Unilivers Dove brand used average models in appearance to get a

favorable response, emphasizing how the majority of consumers actually see themselves and

how actually they can be better using the products.). With regards to the relative effectiveness

of each strategy, the previous research suggested far greater importance of actual self-congruity

(than ideal self-congruity) in attaining a consumers strong emotional attachment to a brand

(Malar et al., 2011). However, this study identified the clear effect of ideal self-congruity, and

therefore, suggests that branding strategies that appeal consumers ideal self-image can be
 104

powerful enough for marketing managers to seriously consider as an alternative of those that

resort to their actual self-image.

Next, in this study, an especially intriguing finding is the positive interaction effects of

self-congruity and brand experience, and this suggests a couple of important implications for

marketing managers in building consumers strong emotional attachment to the brand. First, in

order to enhance the effectiveness of a branding strategy, in which the brand image is sought to

attract the target consumers, marketing managers should focus on creating strong positive

impressions of the brand (i.e., brand experience) rather than further trying to adjust the brand

personality to the target. As the brand literature suggests, a branding strategy that may affect its

brand image (e.g., brand extension, brand repositioning) can damage the values of the brand.

Also, the existence of the interaction effects found in this study implies that the positive effects

of self-congruity can be much more effectively leveraged by brand experience. Accordingly,

marketing managers should consider boosting the effects that they assumed to attain from self-

brand image fit, by emphasizing on evoking consumers stronger positive impressions. Second,

marketing managers should consider attracting such consumers that may not necessarily fit their

brand image or brand personality by enhancing positive impressions of the brand. The results

also suggest that brand experience facilitates formation of brand attachment across various types

of consumers, depending on the degree of self-congruity (in the interaction effects). In addition,

Wheelers (2007) active-self account suggested that strong brand experience can temporarily

activate specific part of self-concept relevant to the brand, which may cause such responses that

are related to the brand-specific ideal or actual self-images, leading various types of consumers

to focus on the brand. Therefore, considering the costs and difficulties in adjusting brand images

to each of different types of consumers, it can be recommended for marketing managers to

 105

emphasize on brand experience (i.e., creating strong positive impressions) in brand strategies, as

an effective way to expand the target markets.

Finally, this study revealed that brand experience itself has a greater impact on emotional

brand attachment than self-congruity. Even when it is considered along with the interaction

effects between these two constructs, this fact suggests the significant importance of brand

experience in attaining a strong attachment, although this may sound contradictory to the original

objective of this study - clearly demonstrating the effect of ideal self-congruity on emotional

brand attachment. These results may suggest that marketing manager as well as marketing

researchers should pay a serious attention to experiential marketing, a recent research stream that

emphasizes the impacts of experiential values, including brand experience, in the development of

marketing strategies (e.g., Schmitt, 2010).

5.3.4 Limitations and Future Research

Some limitations of the study are worth noting because they provide ideas for future

research. First, the findings are derived from the examination of just one product category

smartphones. Although this product category was carefully chosen based on its desirable

properties to focus on the effects of brand itself, such as its limited price range or similarity in

the functional aspects, the robustness of the findings may have to be investigated across other

self-expressive product categories. Possibly, other factors (e.g., price ranges, functional

differences, variety of product designs) may need to be carefully taken into consideration to

adjust unique characteristics of each product category so that the study can clearly detect the

same effects or determine to reject the current findings. Also, testing the findings using product

categories outside of the scope of this study, such as fast-moving consumer goods or privately

consumed products, or examining the same effects in other contexts, such as service brands, shop
 106

brands, corporate brands, or school brands may also be helpful in verifying the generalizability

of the present findings.

Second, the other major limitations might include that this study did not specifically

investigate the possible individual sources (i.e., antecedents) of brand experience. Some of recent

studies have made attempts to identify the peculiar nature of brand-related information (e.g.,

narrative styles) or the specific channels of consumers interactions with brands (e.g., social

influence) that would affect the ensuing overall impressions of a brand or emotional attachment

to the brand (e.g., Phillips and McQuarrie, 2010; Grisaffe and Nguyen, 2011). By contrast, the

current study intended to capture those influences at a higher level of abstraction - in the form of

the positive impacts of consumers accumulated experiences or interactions with a brand - using

the novel concept of brand experience. In the current study, this approach was taken because of

the following reasons: 1) the individual roles or effects of such sources or channels can

considerably vary across the contexts, such as product categories or target market; and 2)

different groups of individuals may interpret the same information (in this context, brand-related

stimuli) in different ways (for example, many young people may get excited to hear rock music

in a TV commercial, while elder people may think of it as annoying), visa versa (i.e., different

contents of such information may have the same effects to the different groups of individuals).

By understanding the effect of consumers past experiences at a higher level of abstraction, this

study made an attempt to overcome such critical issues.

However, in order to facilitate practical applications to individual contexts, future

research needs to clearly address such issues at more concrete levels, so that marketing

practitioners can figure out effective ways to enhance consumers brand experience and establish

their emotional attachment to the brand. Fortunately, several groups of marketing researchers,
 107

psychologists, or neuroscientists have started working to identify brain functions related to brand

experience and emotional brand attachment, by directly observing activation patterns in

consumers brain using such a technology as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)

(e.g., Aron et al., 2005; Esch et al., 2012). Although the current study was built on the findings of

their predecessors, including those by neuroscientists, it did not directly observe what is actually

happening in mind. By overcoming such limitations, this emerging research stream will

contribute to the identification of the specific brain functions that would work in common across

different brand-related contexts, let alone making it possible to more objectively measure the

intensity of positive responses evoked by brand-related stimuli as well as to directly observe how

specific stimuli affect the intensity. Through such findings, future research should offer better

understandings that might enable marketers to test the effectiveness of individual branding

strategies.

Finally, this study focused solely on the positive impact created by a consumers

interactions with a brand. Meanwhile, because a consumers attachment to a brand develops over

a substantial period of time, the formation process may be affected by such interactions that

cause negative responses in a consumers mind. For example, some groups of target consumers

may experience negative feelings for a novel but wild advertisement, which the marketer may

not have intended. At other times, an inevitable service failure may result in a consumers

negative impressions of a brand, even temporarily. Considering such practical relevance, the

research topics concerning the effects of the negative impact of brands for example, how the

negative impact of a brand influences the formation process of a consumers attachment to a

brand and the subsequent outcomes, or how practitioners can effectively recover from such

damages - may be particularly intriguing and be of great importance.

 108

5.4 Conclusion

This study offers new insights into the psychological processes that determine the

formation of emotional brand attachment. By integrating multiple research streams that have

been emerging recently, this research has developed a comprehensive explanation of the

psychological processes, on the basis of which the research hypotheses were derived and

empirically tested. Specifically, this study has found the following:

Both ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity have a direct and positive effect on

emotional brand attachment;

Brand experience has a direct and positive effect on emotional brand attachment;

For both of ideal self-congruity and actual self-congruity, there is a positive

interaction effect between self-congruity and brand experience on emotional brand

attachment, in such a way that self-congruity has a greater effect on emotional brand

attachment when brand experience is high than when it is low;

Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on willingness to pay a

brand premium; and

Emotional brand attachment has a direct and positive effect on likelihood of positive

word-of-mouth.

In sum, 1) ideal self-congruity, actual self-congruity, and brand experience individually enhance

a consumers emotional attachment to a brand; 2) brand experience still amplifies the effects of

both types of self-congruity, boosting the emotional attachment; and 3) the resulting emotional

brand attachment leads to consumers willingness to pay a brand premium and likelihood of

positive word-of-mouth.
 109

REFERENCES

Aaker, Jennifer L. (1995), Brand Personality: Conceptualization, Measurement and Underlying

Psychological Mechanism, PhD Dissertation. Stanford University, Stanford.

Aaker, Jennifer L. (1997), Dimensions of Brand Personality, Journal of Marketing Research,

34 (3), 34756.

Aaker, Jennifer L. (1999), The Malleable Self: The Role of Self-Expression in Persuasion,
Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (1), 4557.

Aaker, Jennifer, L., Veronica Benet-Martinez, and Jordi Garolera (2001), "Consumption
Symbols as Careers of Culture: A Study of Japanese and Spanish Brand Personality
Constructs," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (3), 492-508.

Aaker, Jennifer L., Susan Fournier, and S. Adam Brasel (2004), When Good Brands Do Bad,
Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (1), 1-16.

Anderson, James C. and David W. Gerbing (1988), Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A
Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach, Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3), 411-
423.

Armstrong, J. Scott and Terry S. Overton (1977), Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail
Surveys, Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (3), 396-402.

Aron, Arthur and Elaine N. Aron (1986). Love and the Expansion of Self. New York:
Hemisphere Publishing.

Aron, Arthur, Elaine N. Aron, Michael Tudor, and Greg Nelson (1991), Close Relationship as
Including Other in the Self, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60 (2), 241-
253.

Aron, Arthur, Meg Paris, and Elaine N. Aron (1995), Fall in Love: Prospective Studies of Self-
Concept Change, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (6), 1102-1112.

Aron, Arthur, Elaine N. Aron, and Christina Norman (2001), Self-Expansion Model of
Motivation and Cognition in Close Relationships and Beyond, In G. J. O. Fletcher and
M. S. Clark (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Interpersonal Process (pp.
478-501). Malden: Blackwell.

Aron, Arthur, Helen Fisher, Debra J. Mashek, Greg Strong, Haifang Li, and Lucy L. Brown
(2005), Reward, Motivation, and Emotion Systems Associated with Early-Stage Intense
Romantic Love, Journal of Neuropsychology, 94 (1), 327-337.
 110

Assael, Henry and John Keon (1982), Nonsampling vs. Sampling Errors in Survey Research,
Journal of Marketing, 46 (2), 114-123.

Bagozzi, Richard P. and Youjae Yi (1989), On the Use of Structural Equation Models in
Experimental Designs, Journal of Marketing Research, 26 (3), 271-284.

Baldwin, Mark W., John P. R. Keelan, Beverly Fehr, Vicki Enns, and Everlyn Koh-Rangarajoo
(1996), "Social-Cognitive Conceptualization of Attachment Working Models:
Availability and Accessibility Effects," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71
(1), 94-109.

Ball, A. Dwayne and Lori H. Tasaki (1992), "The Role and Measurement of Attachment in
Consumer Behavior, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1 (2), 155-172.

Bargh, John A., Mark Chen, and Lara Burrows (1996), Automaticity of Social Behavior:
Directs of Trait Construct and Stereotype Activation on Action, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 71 (2), 230-244.

Bargh, John A. and Tanya L. Chartrand (1999), The Unbearable Automaticity of Being,
American Psychologist, 54 (7), 462-479.

Bargh, John A. and Melissa J. Ferhuson (2000), Beyond Behaviorism, On the Automaticity of
Higher Mental Process, Psychological Bulletin, 126 (6), 925-945.

Bargh, John A., Peter M. Gollwitzer, Annette Lee-Chai, Kimberly Barndollar, and Roman
Trotschel (2001), The Automated Will: Nonconscious Activation and Pursuit of
Behavioral Goals, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (6), 1014-1027.

Batra, Rajeev, Aaron Ahuvia, and Richard Bagozzi (2012), Brand Love, Journal of Marketing,
76 (2), 1-16.

Baumgartner, Hans and Christian Homburg (1996), Applications of Structural Equation

Modeling in Marketing and Consumer Research: A Review, International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 13 (April), 139-161.

Bearden, William O. and Michael J. Etzel (1982), Reference Group Influence on Product and
Brand Purchase Decisions, Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (2), 183-194.

Belch, George E. (1978), "Belief Systems and the Differential Role of the Self-Concept,
Advance in Consumer Research, 5 (1), 320-325.

Belk, Russel W. (1988), Possessions and the Extended Self, Journal of Consumer Research,
15 (2), 139-168.

Bentler, Peter M. and Douglas G. Bonnet (1980), Significance Tests and Goodness-of-Fit in the
Analysis of Covariance Structure, Psychological Bulletin, 88 (3), 588-606.
 111

Bentler, Peter M. and Theo Dijkstra (1985), Efficient Estimation via Linearization in Structural
Models, In P.R. Krishniaih (Ed.), Multivariate Analysis, VI (pp. 9-41). Amsterdam:
North-Holland.

Bentler, Peter M. and Chih-Ping Chou (1987), Practical Issues in Structural Modeling,
Sociological Methods & Research, 16 (1), 78-117.

Bentler, Peter M. (1990), Comparative Fit Indices in Structural Models, Psychological Bulletin,
107 (2), 238-246.

Bentler, Peter M. (1994), EQS Structural Equations Program. Encino: Multivariate Software.

Bentler, Peter M. (1995), EQS Program Manual. Encino: Multivariate Software.

Boldero, Jennifer and Jill Francis (2002), Goals, Standards, and the Self: Reference Values
Serving Different Functions, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6 (3), 232-241.

Bollen, Kenneth A. (1989), Structural Equations with Latent Variables, New York: Wiley.

Bourne, Francis S. (1957), Group Influence in Marketing and Public Relation, In R. Likert and
S. P. Hayes (Eds.), Some Application of Behavioral Research (pp. 207-257). Basel:
UNESCO.

Bowlby, John. (1979), The Making and Breaking of Affectional Bonds. London: Tavistock

Brakus, J. Josko (2001), A Theory of Consumer Experiences, PhD Dissertation. Columbia

University, New York.

Brakus, J. Josko, Bernd H. Schmitt, and Lia Zarantonello (2009), Brand Experience: What Is It?
How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73 (3), 52-68.

Brown, Jonathon D., Rebecca L. Collins, and Greg W. Schmidt (1988), "Self-Esteem and Direct
versus Indirect Forms of Self-Enhancement, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 55 (3), 445-453.

Brown, Tom J., Thomas E. Barry, Peter A. Dacin, and Richard F. Gunst (2005), Spreading the
Word: Investing Antecedents of Consumers Positive Word-of-Mouth Intentions and
Behaviors in a Retailing Context, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 33 (2),
123-138.

Byrne, Barbara B. (1994), Structural Equation Modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Carroll, Barbara A. and Aaron C. Ahuvia (2006), Some Antecedents and Outcomes of Brand
Love, Marketing Letters, 17 (2), 79-90.
 112

Caver, Charles S. and Michael F. Scheier (1981), Attention and Self-Regulation: A Control-
Theory Approach to Human Behavior. New York: Springer Verlag.

Carver, Charles. S. and Michael F. Scheier (1990), Origin and Functions of Positive and
Negative Affect: A Control-Process View, Psychological Review, 97 (1), 19-35.

Chaplin, Lan N. and Deborah R. John (2005), The Development of Self-Brand Connections in
Children and Adolescents, Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (1), 119-129.

Chartrand, L. Tanya and John A. Bargh (1996), Automatic Activation of Impression Formation
and Memorization Goals: Nonconscious Goal Priming Reproduces Effects of Explicit
Task Instructions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71 (3), 464-478.

Chartrand, L. Tanya (2005), The Role of Conscious Awareness in Consumer Behavior,

Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (3), 203-210.

Chartrand, Tanya L., Joel Huber, Baba Shiv, and Robin J. Tanner (2008), Nonconscious Goals
and Consumer Choice, Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (2), 189-201.

Chatterjee, Promothese and Randall L. Rose (2012), Do Payment Mechanisms Change the Way
Consumers Perceive Products? Journal of Consumer Research, 38 (6), 1129-1139.

Chattopadhyay, Amitava and Jean-Louis Laborie (2005), Managing Brand Experience: The
Market Contact Audit, Journal of Advertising Research, 45 (1), 9-16.

Cheng, Shirley Y. Y., Tiffany Barnett White, and Lan N. Chaplin (2012), The Effects of Self-
Brand Connections on Responses to Brand Failure: A New Look at the Consumer-Brand
Relationship, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (2), 280-288.

Chernev, Alexander, Ryan Hamilton, and David Gal (2011), Competing for Consumer Identify:
Limits to Self-Expression and the Perils of Lifestyle Branding, Journal of Marketing, 75
(3), 66-82.

Choi, Young Gin, Chihyung Ok, and Sunghyup Sean Hyun (2011), Evaluation Relationships
among Brand Experience, Brand Personality, Brand Prestige, Brand Relationship Quality,
and Brand Loyalty: An Empirical Study of Coffeehouse Brands, In Proceedings of the
16th Graduate Students Research Conference, January 2011, Houston. [available at
http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1283&context=gradconf_hos
pitality]

Churchill, Gilbert Jr. (1979), A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing
Constructs, Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (1), 64-73.
 113

Cronbach, Lee J. (1951), Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests, Psychometrika,
16 (3), 297-334.

Cialdini, Robert B., Richard J. Borden, Avril Thorne, Marcus Randall Walker, Stephen Freeman,
and Lloyd Reynolds Sloan (1976), Basking in Reflected Glory: Three (Football) Field
Studies, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34 (3), 366-375.

Collins, Rebecca L. (1996), For Better or Worse: The Impact of Upward Social Comparison on
Self-Evaluations, Psychological Bulletin, 119 (1), 51-69.

Custer, Ruud and Henk Aarts (2005), Positive Affect as Implicit Motivator: On the
Nonconscious Operation of Behavioral Goals, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 89 (2), 129-142.

Custer, Ruud and Henk Aarts (2007), Goal-Discrepant Situation Prime Goal-Directed Actions
If Goals Are Temporarily or Chronically Accessible, Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 33 (5), 623-633.

Digman, John. M (1990), Personality Structure: Emergence of the Five-Factor Model, Annual
Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.

Dijksterhuis, Ap and Pamela K. Smith (2005), What Do We Do Unconsciously? And How?

Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (3), 225-229.

Ditto, Peter H. and David F. Lopez (1992), Motivated Skepticism: Use of Differential Decision
Criteria for Preferred and Nonpreferred Conclusions, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63 (4), 568-584.

Dolich, Ira J. (1969), "Congruence Relationships between Self-Images and Product Brands,
Journal of Marketing Research, 6 (1), 80-84.

Dutton, Donald G. and Arthur P. Aron (1974), Some Evidence for Heightened Sexual
Attraction under Conditions of High Anxiety, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 30 (4), 510-517.

Epstein, Seymour. (1985), The Implication of Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory for Research

in Social and Personality, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, Vol.15 (3), 281-
310.

Escalas, Jennifer E. and James R. Bettman (2005), Self-Construal, Reference Groups, and
Brand Meaning, Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (3), 378-389.

Esch, Franz-Rudolf, Thorsten Moll, Bernd Schmitt, Christian E. Elger, Carolin Neuhaus, and
Bernd Weber (2012), Brands on the Brain: Do Consumers Use Declarative Information
 114

or Experienced Emotions to Evaluate Brands? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (1),

75-85.

Evans, Franklin B. (1959), Psychological and Objective Factors in the Prediction of Brand
Choice: Ford vs. Chevolet, Journal of Business, 32 (October), 340.

Fedorikin, Alexpander, C. Whan Park, and Matthew Thomson (2008), "Beyond Fit and Attitude:
The Effect of Emotional Attachment on Consumer Responses to Brand Extensions,
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18 (4), 281-291.

Ferraro, Rosellina, James R. Bettman, and Tanya L. Chartrand (2009), The Power of Strangers:
The Incidental Consumer Brand Encounters on Brand Choice, Journal of Consumer
Research, 35 (5), 729-741.

Fitzsimons, Grainne M. and John A. Bargh (2003), Thinking of You: Nonconscious Pursuit of
Interpersonal Goals Associated with Relationship Partners, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 84 (1), 148-164.

Fitzsimons, Grainne M., Tanya Cartrand, and Gavan J. Fitzsimons (2008), Automatic Effects of
Brand Exposure on Motivated Behavior: How Apple Makes You Think Different,
Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (1), 21-35.

Fletcher, Garth J. O., Jeffery A. Simpson, Geoff Thomas, and Louise Giles (1999), "Ideals in
Intimate Relationships," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 (1), 72-89.

Fornell, Claes and David F. Larcker (1981), Evaluating Structural Equation Models with
Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1),
39-50.

Fornell, Claes (1987), A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis: Classification of Methods

and Implications for Marketing Research, In M. J. Houston (Ed.), Review of Marketing
(pp. 407-450). Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Foster, Craig A., Betty S. Witcher, W. Keith Campbell, and Jeffery D. Green (1998), Arousal
and Attraction: Evidence for Automatic and Controlled Processes, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (1), 86-101.

Fournier, Susan (1998), Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in
Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 343-373.

Gao, Leilei S., Christian Wheeler, and Baba Shiv (2009), The Shaken Self: Product Choices
as a Means of Restoring Self View Confidence, Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (1),
29-38.
 115

Geuens, Maggie, Bert Weijters, and Kristof de Wulf (2009), A New Measure of Brand
Personality, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26 (2), 97-107.

Gillath, Omri, Mario Mikulincer, Grainne M. Fitzsimons, Phillip R. Shaver, Dory A. Schachner,
and John A. Bargh (2006), Automatic Activation of Attachment-Related Goals,
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32 (10), 1375-1388.

Grisaffe, Douglas B. and Hieu P. Nguyen (2011), Antecedents of Emotinal Attachment to

Brands, Journal of Business Research, 64 (10), 1052-1059.

Grohmann, Bianca (2009), Gender Dimensions of Brand Personality, Journal of Marketing

Research, 46 (1), 105-119.

Grubb, Edward L. and Harrison L. Grathwohl (1967), Consumer Self-Concept, Symbolism and
Market Behavior: A Theoretical Approach, Journal of Marketing, 31 (4), 22-27.

Ha, Hong-Youl and Helen Perks (2005), Effects of Consumer Perceptions of Brand Experience
on the Web: Brand Familiarity, Satisfaction and Brand Trust, Journal of Consumer
Behavior, 4 (6), 438-452.

Hair, Joseph F. Jr., William C. Black, Barry J. Babin, Rolph E. Anderson, and Ronald L. Tatham
(2006), Multivariate Data Analysis 6th edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Harrison-Walker, L. Jean (2001), The Measurement of Word-of-Mouth Communication and an

Investigation of Service Quality and Customer Commitment as Potential Antecedents,
Journal of Service Research, 4 (August), 60-75.

Hazan, Cindy and Phillip R. Shaver (1994), Attachment as an Organizational Framework for
Research on Close Relationships, Psychological Inquiry, 5 (1), 1-22.

Henry, Paul C. (2005), Social Class, Market Situation, and Consumers Metaphor of
(Dis)Empowerment, Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (4), 766-778.

Higgins, E. Tory (1987), Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self and Affect, Psychological
Review, 94 (3), 319-340.

Holt, Douglas B. (1998), Does Cultural Capital Structure American Consumption? Journal of
Consumer Research, 25 (1), 1-25.

Holt, Douglas B. (2004), How Brands Become Icons: the Principles of Cultural Branding.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Hutchinson, J. Wesley and Eric Eisenstein (2008), Consumer Learning and Expertise, In C. P.
Haugtvedt, P. M. Herr, and F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of Consumer Psychology (pp.
103-132). New York: Psychology Press.
 116

Iglesias, Oriol, Jatinder J. Singh, and Joan M. Batista-Foguet (2011), The Role of Brand
Experience and Affective Commitment in Determining Brand Loyalty, Brand
Management, 18 (8), 570-582.

James, William (1890), Principles of Psychology. New York: Holt.

Janiszewski, Chris and Stijn M. J. van Osselaer (2005), Behavior Activation Is Not Enough,
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (3), 218-224.

Janiszewski, Chris (2008), Goal-Directed Perception, In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. M. Herr, and F. R.

Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of Consumer Psychology (pp. 103-132). New York:
Psychology Press.

Johar, Gita V., Jaideep Sengupta, and Jennifer L. Aaker (2005), "Two Roads to Upgrading Brand
Personality Impressions: Trait versus Evaluative Inferencing, Journal of Marketing
Research, 42 (4), 458-469.

Johar, J. S. and M. Joseph Sirgy (1991), Value-Expressive versus Utilitarian Advertising

Appeals: When and Why to Use Which Appeal, Journal of Advertising, 20 (3), 23-33.

Joreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sorbom (1989), LISREL 7: A Guide to the Program and Applications
2nd edition. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.

Kamptner, N. Laura (1991), "Personal Possessions and Their Meanings A Lifespan

Perspective, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6 (6), 209-228.

Kassarjian, Harold, H. (1971), Personality and Consumer Behavior: A Review, Journal of

Marketing Research, 8 (4), 409-418.

Katz, Daniel (1960), The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes, Public Opinion
Quarterly, 24 (2), 163-204.

Keller, Kevin L. (1993), Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand

Equity, Journal of Marketing, 57 (1), 1-22.

Kent, Robert J. and Chris T. Allen (1994), Competitive Interference Effects in Consumer
Memory for Advertising: The Role of Brand Familiarity, Journal of Marketing, 58 (3),
97-105.

Kernan, Jerome B. and Montrose S. Sommers (1967), Meaning, Value, and the Theory of
Promotion, Journal of Communication, 2 (June), 109-135.

Kim, Hae-Ryong, Moonkyu Lee, and Francis M. Ulgado (2005), Brand Personality, Self-
Congruity and The Consumer-Brand Relationship, Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer
Research, 6, 111-117.
 117

Kleine, Robert E., III, Susan S. Kleine, and Jerome B. Kernan (1993), Mundane Consumption
and the Self: A Social-Identity Perspective, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2 (3),
209-235.

Kleine, Susan S., Robert E. Kleine, III, and Chris T. Allen (1995), How is a Possession Me or
Not Me: Characterizing Types and an Antecedents of Material Possession Attachment,
Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (3), 327-343.

Kobayashi, Hideki (2005), Strategic Evolution of Eco-Products: A Product Life Cycle Planning
Methodology, Research in Engineering Design, 16 (1-2), 1-16.

Kressmann, Frank, M. Joseph Sirgy, Andreas Hermann, Frank Huber, Stephanie Huber, and
Dong-Jin Lee (2006), Direct and Indirect Effects of Self-Image Congruence on Brand
Loyalty, Journal of Business Research, 59 (9), 955-964.

Laran, Juliano, Amy Dalton, and Eduardo Andrade (2011), The Curious Case of Behavioral
Backlash: Why Brands Produce Priming Effects and Slogans Produce Reverse Effects,
Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (6), 999-1014.

Landon, E. Laird, Jr. (1974), Self Concept, Ideal Self Concept, and Consumer Purchase
Intentions, Journal of Consumer Research, 1 (2), 44-51.

Lazzari, Renato, Mario Fioravanti, and Harrison G. Gough (1978), A New Scale for the
Adjective Check List Based on Self Versus Ideal Discrepancies, Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 34 (2), 361-365.

Leary, Mark. R. (2007), Motivational and Emotional Aspects of the Self, Annual Review of
Psychology, 51 (January), 317-344.

Lecky, Prescott (1945), Self-Consistency: A Theory of Personality. New York: Island Press.

Levi, Sidney J. (1959), "Symbols for Sale, Harvard Business Review, 37 (4), 117-124.

Li, Fuzhong, Peter Harmer, Terry E. Duncan, Susan C. Duncan, Alan Acock, and Shawn Boles
(1998), Approaches to Testing Interaction Effects Using Structural Equation Modeling
Methodology, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33 (1), 1-39.

Little, Todd D., William A. Cunningham, Golan Shahar, and Keith F. Widaman (2002), To
parcel or Not to Parcel: Exploring the Question, Weighing the Merits, Structural
Equation Modeling, 9 (2), 151-173.

MacCallum, Robert C., Michael W. Browne, and Hazuki M. Sugawara (1996), Power Analysis
and Determination of Sample Size for Covariance Structure Modeling, Psychological
Methods, 1 (2), 130-149.
 118

Malar, Lucia, Krohmer, Harley, Hoyer, Wayne D., and Nyffenegger, Bettina (2011), Emotional
Brand Attachment and Brand Personality: The Relative Importance of the Actual and the
Ideal Self, Journal of Marketing, 75 (4), 35-52.

Mardia, Kanti V. (1970), Measures of Multivariate Skewness and Kurtosis with Applications,
Biometrika, 57 (3), 519-530.

Markus, Hazel (1977), Self-Schemata and Processing Information about the Self, Journal of
Social and Personality Psychology, Vol.35 (2), 63-78.

Markus, Hazel and Ziva Kunda (1986), Stability and Malleability of the Self-Concept, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (4), 858-866.

Markus, Hazel and Paula Nurius (1986), Possible Selves, American Psychologist, 41 (9), 954-
969.

Markus, Hazel and Elissa Wurf (1987), The Dynamic Self-Concept: A Social Psychological
Perspective, Annual Review of Psychology, 38 (February), 299-337.

Maxham III, James G. and Richard G. Netemeyer (2003), The Effects of Shared Values and
Perceived Organizational Justice on Customer Evaluations of Complaint Handling,
Journal of Marketing, 67 (1), 46-62.

Mikulincer, Mario and Phillip R. Shaver (2003), "The Attachment Behavioral System in
Adulthood: Activation, Psychodynamics, and Interpersonal Process," In M. P. Zanna
(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.35 (pp. 53-152). San Diego:
Academic Press.

Mikulincer, Mario and Phillip R. Shaver (2007), Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, Dynamics,
and Change. New York: Guilford Press.

Netemeyer, Richard G., William O. Bearden, and Subhash Sharma (2003), Scaling Procedures:
Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Netemeyer, Richard G., Balaji Krishnan, Chris Pullig, Guangping Wang, Mehmet Yagei, Dwane
Dean, Joe Ricks, and Ferdinand Wirth (2004), Developing and validating measures of
facets of customer-based brand equity, Journal of Business Research, 57 (2), 209-224.

Nielsen (2012a), Two Third of New Mobile Buyers Now Opting for Smartphones, News Wire.
(accessed July 20, 2012) [available at http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2012/two-
thirds-of-new-mobile-buyers-now-opting-for-smartphones.html]

Nielsen (2012b), Americas New Mobile Majority: A Look at Smartphone Owners in the U.S.,
News Wire. (accessed July 20, 2012) [available at
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2012/who-owns-smartphones-in-the-us.html]
 119

Novak, Thomas, Donna Hoffman, and Yiu-Fai Yung (2000), Measuring the Customer in Online
Environments: A Structural Modeling Approach, Marketing Science, 19 (Winter), 22-42.

Nunnally, Jum C. (1978), Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nunnally, Jum C. and Ira Bernstein (1994), Psychometric Theory 3rd edition. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Oliver, Richard L. (1999), Whence Consumer Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63 (Special

Issue), 33-44.

Paolacci, Gabriele, Jesse Chandler, and Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis (2010), Running Experiments on
Amazon Mechanical Turk, Judgment and Decision Making, Vol.5 (5), 411-419.

Park, C. Whan, and Joseph Priester (2006), Beyond Attitudes: Attachment and Consumer
Behavior, Seoul National Journal, 12 (2), 3-36.

Park, C. Whan, Deborah J. MacInnis, Joseph Priester, Andreas B. Eisingerich, and Dawn
Iacobucci (2010), Brand Attachment and Brand Attitude Strength: Conceptual and
Empirical Differentiation of Two Critical Brand Equity Drivers, Journal of Marketing,
74 (6), 1-17.

Phillips, Barbara J. and Edward F. McQuarrie (2010), Narrative and Persuasion in Fasion
Advertising, Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (3), 368-392.

Ping, Robert (2007), Second-Order Latent Variables: Interactions, Specification, Estimation,

and an Example, In 2007 American Marketing Association Winter Educators
Conference Proceedings, February 2007, San Diego, 286-293.

Podsakoff, Phillip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, and Nathan P. Podsakoff (2003), Common Method
Bias in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended
Remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology, 38 (5), 879-903.

Richins, Marsha L. (1994a), "Special Possessions and the Expression of Material Values,
Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (3), 522-533.

Richins, Marsha L. (1994b), "Valuing Things: The Public and Private Meanings of Possessions,
Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (3), 504-521.

Rigdon, Edward E. (1998), Structural Equation Modeling, In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern

Methods for Business Research (pp. 251-294). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Rogers, Carl. R. (1961), On Becoming a Person: A Therapists View of Psychotherapy. Boston:

Houghton Mifflin.
 120

Rosenberg, Morris (1965), The Measurement of Self-Esteem: Society and the Adolescent Self-
Image. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Rosenberg, Morris (1979), Conceiving the Self. New York: Basic Books.

Schenk, Carolyn T. and Rebecca Holman (1980), "A Sociological Approach to Brand Choice:
The Concept of Situational Self-Image, Advance in Consumer Research, 7 (1), 610-614.

Schmitt, Bernd (1999), Experiential Marketing, Journal of Marketing Management, 15 (1-3),

53-67.

Schmitt, Bernd (2009), The Concept of Brand Experience, Journal of Brand Management, 16
(7), 417-419.

Schmitt, Bernd (2010), Experience Marketing: Concepts, Frameworks and Consumer Insights,
Foundation and Trends in Marketing, 5 (2), 55-112.

Schmitt, Bernd (2012), The Consumer Psychology of Brands, Journal of Consumer

Psychology, 22 (1), 7-17.

Schouten, John W. and James H. McAlexander (1995), "Subculture of Consumption: An

Ethnography of the New Bikers, Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (1), 43-61

Schultz, Susan E., Robert E. Kleine, and Jerome B. Kernan (1989), "There are a few of my
favorite things: Toward an Explication of Attachment as A Consumer Behavior
Construct, Advances in Consumer Research, 16 (1), 359-366.

Schultz, Don E. (2007), A Tale of Two Brand Experiences, Marketing Management, 16 (3),
10-11.

Sedikides, Constantine and Michael J. Strube (1997), Self-Evaluation: To Thine Own-Self Be

Good, to Thine Own-Self Be Sure, to Thine Own-Self Be True, and to Thine Own-Self
Better, In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advance in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 29 (pp.
209-269). San Diego: Academic Press.

Sela, Aner and Baba Shiv (2009), Unraveling Priming: When Does the Same Prime Activate a
Goal versus a Trait? Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (3), 418-433.

Shah, James (2003), Automatic for the People: How Representations of Significant Others
Implicitly Affect Goal Pursuit, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (4),
661-681.

Shimp, Terence A. and Thomas J. Madden (1988), "Consumer-Object Relations: A Conceptual

Framework Based Analogously on Sternbergs Triangular Theory of Love, Advances in
Consumer Research, 15 (1), 163-168.
 121

Sirgy, M. Joseph and Jeffery E. Danes (1982), Self-image/product-image congruence models:

testing selected models, Advances in Consumer Research, 9 (1), 556561.

Sirgy, M. Joseph (1982), "Self-concept in Consumer Behaviour: A Critical Review", Journal of

Consumer Research, 9 (3), 287-300.

Sirgy, M. Joseph (1985), "Using self-congruity and ideal congruity to predict purchase
motivation," Journal of Business Research, 13 (3), 195-206.

Sirgy, M. Joseph (1986), Self-Congruity: Toward a Theory of Personality and Cybernetics. New
York: Praeger Publishers.

Sirgy, M. Joseph, J. S. Johar, A. Coskun Samli, and C. B. Claiborne (1991), Self-congruity

versus functional congruity: predictors of consumer behavior, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 19 (7), 363375.

Sirgy, M. Joseph, Dhruv Grewal, Tamara F. Mangleburg, Jae-Ok Park, Kye-Sung Chon, C. B.
Claiborne, J. S. Johar, and Harold Berkman (1997), Assessing the predictive validity of
two methods of self-image congruence, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
25 (3), 229241.

Sirgy, M. Joseph, Dhruv Grewal, and Tamara Mangleburg (2000), Retail environment, self-
congruity, and retail patronage: an integrative model and a research agenda, Journal of
Business Research, 49 (2), 127138.

Shrauger, J. Sidney (1975), Responses to Evaluation as a Function of Initial Self-Perceptions,

Psychological Bulletin, 82 (4), 581-596.

Smeesters, Dirk, Luk Warlop, Oliver Corneille, Eddy Van Avermaet, and Vincent Yzerbyt
(2003), Do Not Prime Hawks with Doves: The Interplay of Construct Activation and
Consistency of Social Value Orientation on Cooperative Behavior, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (5), 972-987.

Stinson, Danu A., Christine Logel, John G. Holmes, Joanne, V. Wood, Amanda L. Forest,
Danielle Gaucher, Grainne M. Fitzsimons, and Jennifer Kath (2010), The Regulatory
Function of Self-Esteem: Testing the Epistemic and Acceptance Signaling Systems,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99 (6), 993-1013.

Sung, Yongjun and Jooyoung Kim (2010), Effects of Brand Personality on Brand Trust and
Brand Affect, Psychology and Marketing, 27 (7), 639-661.

Swaminathan, Page, and Gurhan-Canli (2007), "'My' Brand or 'Our' Brand: The Effects of Brand
Relationship Dimensions and Self-Construal on Brand Evaluations, Journal of
Consumer Research, 34 (2), 248-259.
 122

Swaminathan, Vanitha, Karen M. Stilley, and Rohini Ahluwania (2009), "When Brand
Personality Matters: The Moderating Role of Attachment Styles, Journal of Consumer
Research, 35 (6), 985-1002.

Swann, William B., Jr. (1983), Self-Verification: Bringing Social Reality into Harmony with
the Self, In J. Suls and A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Social Psychological Perspective in the
Self, Vol. 2 (pp. 33-66). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Swann, William B. Jr., Alan Stein-Seroussi, and R. Brian Geisler (1992), Why People Self-
Verify, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62 (3), 392-401.
Swann, William B., John J. Griffin, Steven C. Predmore, and Bebe Gaines (1987), "The
Cognitive-Affective Crossfire: When Self-Consistence Confronts Self-Enhancement,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (5), 881-889.

Tesser, Abraham (1986), Some Effects of Self-Evaluation Maintenance on Cognition and

Action, In R. M. Sorrentino and E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of Motivation and
Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior (pp. 435-464). New York: Guilford Press.

Thomson, Matthew, Deborah J. MacInnis, and C. Whan Park (2005), The Ties That Bind:
Measuring the Strength of Consumers Emotional Attachments to Brands, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 15 (1), 77-91.

Wallendorf, Melanie and Eric J. Arnould (1988), "'My Favorite Things': A Cross-Cultural
Inquiry into Object Attachment, Pssessiveness, and Social Linkage," Journal of
Consumer Research, 14 (4), 531-547.

Wheeler, S. Christian, Kenneth G. DeMarree, and Richard E. Petty (2007), Understanding the
Role of the Self in Prime-to-Behavior Effects: The Active-Self Account, Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 11 (3), 234-261.

Whelan, Susan and Markus Wohlfeil (2006), Communicating Brands through Engagement with
Lived Experiences, Brand Management, 13 (4), 313-329.

Wicklund, Robert A. and Peter M. Gollwitzer (1982), Symbolic Self-Completion. Hillsdale:

Erlbaum.

Wylie, Ruth. C. (1979), The Self-Concept: Theory and Research on Selected Topics, Vol. 2.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Yang, Defeng and Jianhua Yang (2010), The Forming Mechanism of Brand Experience, In
Proceedings of Management and Service Science, 2010 International Conference, August
2010, Wuhan,1-3.

Yoo, Boonghee and Naveen Donthu (2001), Developing and Validating a Multidimensional
Consumer-based Brand Equity Scale, Journal of Business Research, 52 (1), 1-14.
 123

Zarantonello, Lia, Bernd H. Schmitt, and Josko J. Brakus (2007), Development of the Brand
Experience Scale, Advances in Consumer Research, 34 (1), 580-582.

Zarantonello, Lia and Bernd H. Schmitt (2010), Using the Brand Experience Scale to Profile
Consumers and Predict Consumer Behavior, Journal of Brand Management, 17 (7),
532-540.

Zhou, Zhimin, Qjyuan Zhang, Chenting Su, and Nan Zhou (2012), How Do Brand
Communities Generate Brand Relationship? Intermediate Mechanism, Journal of
Business Research, 65 (7), 890-895.
APPENDICES
 124

Appendix A

Scale Items used in the Pretest Survey

Publicly/Privately consumer product scale (a Likert-type item anchored by 1 = Strongly Disagree,

7 = Strongly Agree; adopted from Bearden and Etzel, 1982)

Most people I know would probably consider a <product category> to be a publicly

consumed product.

Expected Period of Use - Participants were asked to record the number of months in a text box

Brand Awareness scale (Likert-type items anchored by 1 = Strongly Disagree, 7 = Strongly

Agree; adopted from Yoo and Donthu, 2001)

I can recognize the <a brand name> brand of smartphones among other copeting brands.
I am aware of the <a brand name> brand of smartphones.
Some characteristics of the <a brand name> brand of smartphones come to my mind
quickly.
I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of the <a brand name> brand of smartphones.
I have difficulty in imaging the <a brand name> brand od smartphones.

Brand Familiarity scale (Likert-type items anchored by 1 = Strongly Disagree, 7 = Strongly

Agree; adopted from Kent and Allen, 1994)

I feel very familiar with the <a brand name> brand of smartphones.
I feel very experienced with the <a brand name> brand of smartphones.
I know the product(s) of the <a brand name> brand of smartphones.
 125

Appendix B

Scale Items used in the Main Study Survey

Below are the items that were used in the main study. Each participant answered to a
questionnaire about one of the five brands that was randomly assigned when they accessed the
survey. The corresponding brand logo was continuously presented at the top left of the screen
with each set of questions concerning the brand. As the survey was presented on a website, each
break to a new page is designated below by a bold line.

[Brand Attachment]

Please indicate the extent to which each of the following statements describes your feeling
toward this brand.

(1 = Not at all; 7 = Extremely)

1. This brand is part of me and who I am. [BA1]

2. I feel personally connected to this brand. [BA2]
3. I feel emotionally bonded to this brand. [BA3]
4. This brand is part of me. [BA4]
5. This brand says something to other people about who you are. [BA5]

[Brand Experience]

The next set of questions are about an array of responses that occur when you experience a
brand.

Here, experience can include any kind of contacts or interactions with a brand, such as usage
experiences, physical touches, looking at the product at a shop, watching or reading its
advertisements, observing people using the product and hearing their reactions, etc.

I would like you to think about such experiences you have had with this brand, and then,
consider how strongly the brand is associated with your sensations, feelings, thoughts, or
behaviors.

I am interested in how strongly these responses are evoked when you think of the <a brand
name> brand of martphone.
 126

At first, please briefly describe sensations, feelings, thoughts, and behaviors that you might have
or have engaged in, alone or with others, when you experience the <a brand name> brand
of smartphone.

For example, Starbucks might be described Smells nice and is visually warm. Also, you might
think that Disney reminds me to use my imagination.

Now, I would like you to consider various aspects of your experiences with this brand and
would like to ask how strongly the brand evokes your sensations, feelings, thoughts, or behaviors.

Please think about how strongly this brand provides positive sensory impressions or aesthetic
appeal in general, after considering such experiences you have had, when you saw, heard of or
handled this smartphone brand, or watched the promotions or other information about this brand.

Once youve done this, indicate the extent to which each of the following statements applies to
you.

(1 = Not at all; 7 = Extremely)

1. This brand makes a strong positive impression on my visual sense or other senses.
[SBE1]
2. I find this brand interesting in a sensory way. [SBE2]
3. This brand appeals to my sense in a positive way. [SBE3]
4. This brand positively excites my senses. [SBE4]
5. This brand has positive sensory appeal. [SBE5]
 127

Please think about how strongly thins brand arouses positive feelings, sentiments or emotional
reactions in general, after considering such experiences you have had, when you saw, heard of or
handled this smartphone brand, or watched the promotions or other information about this brand.

Once youve done this, indicate the extent to which each of the following statements applies to
you.

(1 = Not at all; 7 = Extremely)

1. This brand induces positive feelings and sentiments. [ABE1]

2. I have strong positive emotions for this brand. [ABE2]
3. This brand evokes positive emotions. [ABE3]
4. This brand creates positive feelings. [ABE4]
5. This brand appeals to positive emotions. [ABE5]

Now, think about how strongly this brand stimulates positive analytical or imaginative thinking
in general, after considering such experiences you have had, when you saw, heard of or handled
this smartphone brand, or watched the promotions or other information about this brand.

(1 = Not at all; 7 = Extremely)

1. I engage in a lot of positive thinking when I encounter this brand. [IBE1]

2. This brand makes me think positively. [IBE2]
3. This brand stimulates my curiosity and problem solving. [IBE3]
4. This brand appeals to my creative thinking. [IBE4]
5. This brand excites my curiosity. [IBE5]

Next, I want you to think about how strongly this brand reminds you of positive bodily
experiences, lifestyles, or active interactions with this brand in general, after considering such
experiences you have had, when you saw, heard of or handled this smartphone brand, or watched
the promotions or other information about this brand.

Once youve done this, indicate the extent to which each of the following statements applies to
you.

(1 = Not at all; 7 = Extremely)

 128

1. I (would) engage in physical actions and behaviors in a positive way when I use this
brand. [BBE1]
2. This brand (would) result(s) in positive bodily experiences. [BBE2]
3. This brand is action oriented in a positive way. [BBE3]
4. This brand reminds me of positive activities one can do. [BBE4]
5. This brand gets me to think about my behaviors in a positive way. [BBE5]

[Brand Personality & Self-Congruity]

The following questions are about an array of personality-like characteristics of brand of

products or services. I would like you to think of this brand as if it were a person.

This may sound unusual, but think of the set of human characteristics associated with each brand.

For example, you might think that the human characteristics associated with Pepto Bismal are
kind, warm, caring, smoothing, gentle, trustworthy and dependable. The human characteristics
associated with Dr. Pepper might be non-conforming, fun, interesting, exciting and off-beat.

I am interested in finding out which personality traits or human characteristics come to mind
when you think of the <a brand name> of smartphone.

Please rate the extent to which the following personality traits describe this brand.

(1 = Not at all; 7 = Extremely)

Down-to-earth
Honest
Wholesome
Cheerful
Daring
Spirited
Imaginative
Up-to-date
Reliable
Intelligent
Successful
Upper-class
Charming
 129

Outdoorsy
Tough

In this section, I would like you to take a moment to think about the personality of this brand
using the personality characteristics you described above.

Then, think about how you would like to see yourself (your ideal self). What kind of person you
would like to be?

Once youve done this, indicate your agreement or disagreement to the following statements.

(1 = Strongly Disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Somewhat Disagree; 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree;

5 = Somewhat Agree; 6 = Agree; 7 = Strongly Agree)

1. The personality of this brand is consistent with how I would like to be (my ideal self).
[ISC1]
2. The personality of this brand is a mirror image of the person I would like to be (my ideal
self). [ISC2]
3. The personality of this brand reflects how I would like to be (my ideal self). [ISC3]
4. The personality of this brand is very much like who I would like to be (my ideal self).
[ISC4]
5. The personality of this brand is similar to who I would like to be (my ideal self). [ISC5]

Now, take a moment to think about the personality of this brand using the personality
characteristics you described above.

Then, think about how you see yourself (your actual self). What kind of person are you? How
would you describe your personality?

Once youve done this, indicate your agreement or disagreement to the following statements.

(1 = Strongly Disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Somewhat Disagree; 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree;

5 = Somewhat Agree; 6 = Agree; 7 = Strongly Agree)

1. The personality of this brand is consistent with how I see myself (my actual self).
[ASC1]
2. The personality of this brand is a mirror image of me (my actual self). [ASC2]
 130

3. The personality of this brand reflects how I see myself (my actual self). [ASC3]
4. The personality of this brand is very much like me (my actual self). [ASC4]
5. The personality of this brand is similar to me (my actual self). [ASC5]

[Willingness to Pay a Brand Premium (WTP) & Positive Word of Mouth (WOM)]

Now, I would like you to indicate your agreement or disagreement to the following statements.

(1 = Strongly Disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Somewhat Disagree; 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree;

5 = Somewhat Agree; 6 = Agree; 7 = Strongly Agree)

1. I am willing to pay a higher price for this brand of smartphone than for other brands of
smartphone. [WTP1]
2. I am willing to pay more for this brand than other brands of smartphone. [WTP2]
3. I would be willing to pay a higher price for this brand over other brands. [WTP3]
4. I am likely to spread positive word of mouth about this brand. [WOM1]
5. I would recommend this brand for a smartphone to my friends. [WOM2]
6. If my friend were looking to purchase smartphone, I would tell them to try this brand.
[WOM3]
7. Choose Agree from the options. [Screening Question]

[Demographic Questions]

What year were you born in?

Please indicate which category includes your current age.

18 24 years old
25 34 years old
35 44 years old
45 54 years old
55 64 years old
65 years old or over

Please indicate your gender.

Male
 131

Female

How would you classify your ethnicity?

Caucasian/White
African American
Hispanic
Asian/Pacific Islander
Native American
Middle Eastern or Arabic
Other

Please indicate which category includes your total annual household income from all sources in
2011.

Less than $25,000

$25,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000 or more

Please indicate your highest level of education completed.

Less than high school

High school (or equivalent)
Some college
Bachelors degree
Masters degree
Doctoral degree (Ph.D.) or other professional degree (J.D., M.D.)
 132

VITA

Graduate School
Southern Illinois University

Keizo Ishikawa

keizoishi@gmail.com

Keio University
Bachelor of Arts, Business and Commerce, March 1994

Rikkyo University
Master of Arts, Business Administration, March 1997

Special Honors and Awards:

Beta Gamma Sigma invitee (2013)
SMA Doctoral Consortium Fellow (2011)

Dissertation Title:
BRAND DYNAMICS: The Effects of Brand Personality and Brand Experience on
Emotional Brand Attachment

Major Professor: Terry Clark