30.12.2014 Views

The role of brand image congruity in Chinese consumers ... - Emerald

The role of brand image congruity in Chinese consumers ... - Emerald

The role of brand image congruity in Chinese consumers ... - Emerald

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Brand <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> <strong>in</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese <strong>consumers</strong>’ <strong>brand</strong> preference<br />

J<strong>in</strong>g Hu, X<strong>in</strong> Liu, Sijun Wang and Zhil<strong>in</strong> Yang<br />

theories from Western markets to emergent markets.<br />

Specifically, through <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g the social reference and<br />

national socio-cultural literature <strong>in</strong>to the current <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong><br />

management literature, this study proposes and tests the <strong>role</strong><br />

<strong>of</strong> functional and symbolic <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> <strong>in</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese<br />

<strong>consumers</strong>’ <strong>brand</strong> preferences <strong>in</strong> the auto market. Further,<br />

this study exam<strong>in</strong>es the <strong>role</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>brand</strong> familiarity <strong>in</strong> moderat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the relationship between <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> and<br />

<strong>consumers</strong>’ preferences. <strong>The</strong> organization <strong>of</strong> our paper is as<br />

follows. Initially, we provide an overview <strong>of</strong> the <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong><br />

and <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> literature, focus<strong>in</strong>g on several<br />

major f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs, their theoretical underp<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>gs, and suggest<br />

differences based on the social reference and national sociocultural<br />

literature. <strong>The</strong>n, we address our research method,<br />

data analysis and results. We conclude with implications,<br />

limitations, and future research directions.<br />

Literature review<br />

Brand <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong><br />

Brand <strong>image</strong> is generally def<strong>in</strong>ed as <strong>consumers</strong>’ perceptions <strong>of</strong><br />

a <strong>brand</strong> (Keller, 1993). This perception <strong>in</strong>fluences the <strong>brand</strong>’s<br />

position<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the market. A good <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> establishes a<br />

<strong>brand</strong>’s position and improves the <strong>brand</strong>’s market<br />

performance (Shocker and Sr<strong>in</strong>ivasan, 1979; W<strong>in</strong>d, 1973).<br />

Brand <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> happens when a <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong><br />

matches <strong>consumers</strong>’ expectations. Schema <strong>congruity</strong> theory<br />

asserts that <strong>congruity</strong> positively <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>consumers</strong>’ <strong>brand</strong><br />

preferences (Fiske, 1982; Fiske and Pavelchak, 1986;<br />

Pavelchak, 1989). A schema is a hypothetical memory<br />

structure that helps people organize new <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

relative to exist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation (Solso, 1989). For example,<br />

<strong>consumers</strong>’ expectations <strong>of</strong> a product can be viewed as<br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g schema. Based on schema <strong>congruity</strong> theory (Fiske,<br />

1982; Fiske and Pavelchak, 1986; Pavelchak, 1989), schema<br />

<strong>congruity</strong> determ<strong>in</strong>es <strong>consumers</strong>’ affective responses. When<br />

the <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> matches expectations, positive evaluation<br />

results. <strong>The</strong> schema theory was orig<strong>in</strong>ally developed and<br />

applied <strong>in</strong> the social science area (Fiske, 1982). Later, many<br />

market<strong>in</strong>g studies borrowed Fiske’s theory to expla<strong>in</strong> issues<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g judgments about consumer products (Aggarwal and<br />

McGill, 2007; Meyers-Levy and Tybout, 1989), <strong>brand</strong><br />

extension evaluations (Broniarczyk and Alba, 1994), and<br />

advertisement evaluations (Houston et al., 1987).<br />

We def<strong>in</strong>e <strong>congruity</strong>, <strong>in</strong> this context, as the perceived<br />

difference between an actual <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> and a consumerdesired<br />

<strong>image</strong>. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Park et al. (1986), <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> has<br />

two dimensions: functional and symbolic. A <strong>brand</strong> positioned<br />

with a functional <strong>image</strong> highlights the tangible and productrelated<br />

utilitarian attributes. Symbolic needs are <strong>in</strong>ternally<br />

generated for self-expression (Park et al., 1986). Symbolic<br />

<strong>brand</strong>s are prestige-oriented for status appeal. Several later<br />

studies (Bhat and Reddy, 1998; Chernatony and Harris, 2000;<br />

Mowle and Merrilees, 2005) supports that the functionality/<br />

symbolism constitutes a two-dimensional construct, and a<br />

<strong>brand</strong> can have the two dimensions at the same time.<br />

<strong>The</strong> two dimensions <strong>of</strong> <strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> generate two types <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>brand</strong> <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong>: functional and symbolic <strong>image</strong><br />

<strong>congruity</strong>. Functional <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> takes place when a<br />

<strong>brand</strong> matches the utilitarian set <strong>of</strong> criteria that <strong>consumers</strong><br />

prefer. This utilitarian set is related to a <strong>brand</strong>’s tangible<br />

attributes, reflect<strong>in</strong>g its functional performance. For example,<br />

functional attributes <strong>of</strong> an automobile <strong>brand</strong> will <strong>in</strong>clude the<br />

Journal <strong>of</strong> Product & Brand Management<br />

Volume 21 · Number 1 · 2012 · 26–34<br />

degree <strong>of</strong> comfort, eng<strong>in</strong>e performance, safety and so forth.<br />

Functional <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> results when a <strong>brand</strong>’s<br />

performance on these attributes matches a consumer’<br />

desired level. In a similar ve<strong>in</strong>, symbolic <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong><br />

occurs as a <strong>brand</strong>’s performance on symbolic attributes match<br />

<strong>consumers</strong>’ desired level. Based on the schema theory, both<br />

types <strong>of</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> will generate <strong>consumers</strong>’ affective<br />

responses. <strong>The</strong>refore, we propose:<br />

H1a. Functional <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> positively <strong>in</strong>fluences<br />

<strong>consumers</strong>’ <strong>brand</strong> preference.<br />

H1b. Symbolic <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> positively <strong>in</strong>fluences<br />

<strong>consumers</strong>’ <strong>brand</strong> preference.<br />

Relationship between symbolic and functional <strong>image</strong><br />

<strong>congruity</strong><br />

From the accessibility-diagnosticity perspective, symbolic<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation is more accessible, and will be processed prior<br />

to functional <strong>in</strong>formation. First, accessibility was def<strong>in</strong>ed by<br />

Feldman and Lynch (1988) as “the degree to which a piece <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>formation can be retrieved from memory for <strong>in</strong>put <strong>in</strong>to a<br />

judgment, and diagnosticity is the degree to which that piece<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation is relevant for that judgment”. Symbolic <strong>image</strong><br />

is related to <strong>in</strong>tangible attributes, such as attractiveness,<br />

friendl<strong>in</strong>ess and etc, and is more abstract than the functional<br />

one. <strong>The</strong> abstract <strong>in</strong>formation requires less cognitive effort to<br />

process than concrete <strong>in</strong>formation (Abelson, 1976; Anderson,<br />

1980). In other words, symbolic <strong>in</strong>formation is more<br />

accessible than functional <strong>in</strong>formation because the former is<br />

easier to be retrieved from memory.<br />

Second, a basic assumption <strong>of</strong> the accessibility-diagnosticity<br />

argument is that <strong>consumers</strong> are “cognitive misers”, and will<br />

not retrieve all <strong>in</strong>formation at a time (Wyer and Scrull, 1986).<br />

Among <strong>in</strong>formation that is diagnostic to the judgment,<br />

<strong>consumers</strong> choose to retrieve the most accessible one first<br />

(Feldman and Lynch, 1988; Wyer and Scrull, 1986). In other<br />

words, the <strong>in</strong>formation most accessible would be chosen first<br />

to make the judgment. S<strong>in</strong>ce symbolic <strong>in</strong>formation is more<br />

accessible than functional ones, we propose that the<br />

process<strong>in</strong>g result <strong>of</strong> symbolic <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> will prime the<br />

judgment <strong>of</strong> the functional <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong>. <strong>The</strong> proposed<br />

relationships are shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 1.<br />

H2. Consumers’ perceived symbolic <strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> has a<br />

positive impact on the perceived functional <strong>image</strong><br />

<strong>congruity</strong>.<br />

Role <strong>of</strong> <strong>brand</strong> familiarity<br />

Brand familiarity <strong>in</strong>dicates <strong>consumers</strong>’ prior knowledge <strong>of</strong><br />

and experience with a <strong>brand</strong> (Alba and Hutch<strong>in</strong>son, 1987;<br />

Campbell and Keller, 2003). Consumers familiar with a<br />

<strong>brand</strong> have a set <strong>of</strong> knowledge about the <strong>brand</strong>, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g its<br />

tangible/<strong>in</strong>tangible attributes and the relationships among<br />

them (Sujan and Bettman, 1989). We suggest that the <strong>brand</strong><br />

familiarity moderates the relationship between the <strong>brand</strong><br />

<strong>image</strong> <strong>congruity</strong> and <strong>brand</strong> preference <strong>in</strong> two ways. First,<br />

familiarity changes the weights <strong>of</strong> congruent and <strong>in</strong>congruent<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> product evaluations. Fiske and Taylor (1991)<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t out that people with well-developed knowledge are able<br />

to notice both schema-<strong>congruity</strong> and <strong>in</strong><strong>congruity</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

whereas those with little knowledge are likely to be especially<br />

sensitive to schema <strong>in</strong><strong>congruity</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation. In this context,<br />

<strong>consumers</strong> familiar with a <strong>brand</strong> will judge the <strong>brand</strong> based on<br />

27

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!