exploring brand personality congruence - K-REx - Kansas State ...

was also empirically proven that self-congruity and brand personality had independent
effects on brand attitude.
In looking at the working definition for brand loyalty, it is important to note that it is
considered as “a deeply held commitment.” However, marketing literature is lacking in the
investigation of direct or indirect paths of congruence to commitment. Fullerton (2003) and
other organizational behavior researchers have implied that commitment springs from strong
feelings of identification. Marconi (2000) implies that it is the building of a public
identification of oneself with the brand that leads to strong brand loyalty. In the context of
this study, this identification is operationalized as BPC . Temporal (2001, p.53) asserts that
when BPC is high, that is the brand and customer personalities are closer, “the greater the
willingness to buy the brand and the deeper the brand loyalty.” Thus, the study seeks to
provide empirical proof that brand personality influences consumer preference (Aaker, 1999)
by suggesting that high levels of BPC are strongly and positively associated with brand
loyalty (H2: Brand personality congruence is positively associated with brand loyalty).
Trust
In marketing literature, it is generally accepted that trust is a fundamental component
for building successful relationships (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999) and that it exists when one
party believes and has confidence in the exchange partner’s reliability and high degree of
integrity (Morgan & Hunt 1994; Hennig-Thurau & Hansen, 2000). This study adopted
Garbarino and Johnson’s (1999) approach of studying trust in the context of the customer’s
trust in the quality and reliability of the services offered in a business-to-customer
framework. In the context of this study, the exchange partner will be operationalized as the
restaurant brand.
Following Anderson and Narus (1990) and Andaleeb’s (1996) lead, it is believed that
the exchange partner will perform actions that will result in positive outcomes for the
customer. Because of this, the customer is willing to take more risks in the relationship
(Morgan & Hunt, 1994), underscoring Moorman, Deshpande, and Zaltman’s (2001)
suggestion that trust exists when the customer is willing “to rely on an exchange partner in
whom one has confidence” (p. 221). Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman (1995) suggest that
20