Affect transfer in brand extensions: the role of expectancy and relevancy
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421011068559 |
| Pages | 317-326 |
| Published date | 24 August 2010 |
| Date | 24 August 2010 |
| Author | Xin Liu,Michael Y. Hu,Pamela E. Grimm |
| Subject Matter | Marketing |
Affect transfer in brand extensions:
the role of expectancy and relevancy
Xin Liu
Department of International Business and Marketing, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, California, USA, and
Michael Y. Hu and Pamela E. Grimm
Marketing Department, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The goal of the paper is to examine the affect transfer process of the brand extension by developing a conceptual framework that integrates
two factors important to this process: the expectancy and relevancy of brand extensions.
Design/methodology/approach – Two experimental studies with a sample of 250 respondents provide empirical support that both expectancy and
relevancy positively influence the affect transfer process.
Findings – The study first tests both factors at the product level as well as at the product attribute level. The two factors enhance the affect transfer
process in different manners. Expectancy facilitates the transfer from the parent product category to the extension, whereas relevancy enhances the
transfer from the brand associations to the extension product. The greatest affect transfer occurs when both factors are present.
Originality/value – The study proposes a theoretical framework that for the first time integrates the two main streams of literature in brand
extensions. The proposed frameworkexplains the affect transfer process in brand extensions, and helps understand consumers’ attitude towards brand
extension products.
Keywords Brand extensions, Expectation
Paper type Research paper
An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
Brand extension, which remain companies’ most frequently
used branding strategy (Volckner and Sattler, 2006), receives
significant attention in both academic and practitioner
domain. Previous studies focus on a critical question: In
which conditions can the equity of the parent brand (B
0
)be
leveraged for an extension product category (P
e
)? From a
consumer perspective, leveraging brand equity means
transferring the brand affect from the parent product (B
0
P
0
)
to the extension product (B
0
P
e
). Previous studies identify two
types of fit that are important in this transfer process: one is
the fit between the parent product and the extension product
(P
0
P
e
fit) and the other is between the parent brand and the
extension product (B
0
P
e
fit).
Most brand extension studies since Aaker and Keller’s
(1990) seminal work on the topic generally follow one of these
two paths but not both. To better understand the nature of
brand extension evaluations, this study attempts to integrate
both views and proposes a conce ptual framework that
explains the roles of the two factors.
The following section reviews previous research in the area
of brand extension and the affect transfer process. The
theoretical framework in the subsequent section integrates
two streams of literature and delineates the affect transfer
process in the context of brand extensions. In the hypotheses
section, this study proposes two factors that may influence the
affect transfer process, expectancy and relevancy, and posits
that the greatest amount of transfer occurs when both levels
are high. Two studies support these hypotheses; this article
concludes with a discussion of the results.
Literature review
For affect to transfer from B
0
P
0
to P
e
, two routes are possible:
from the parent product (P
0
) to the extension product (P
e
)or
from the brand (B
0
) to the extension product (P
e
). Literature
addressing P
0
P
e
fit suggests that consumers focus on the
category relationship when evaluating brand extensions, as
exemplified by Aaker and Keller’s (1990) perceived fit
concept. Perceived fit consists of three dimensions:
complement (how P
e
is complementary to P
0
), substitute
(how P
e
might can substitute for P
0
), and the transfer of a
manufacturer’s expertise. Aaker and Keller (1990) show that,
among the three items, only the transfer of manufacturing
skills has a direct impact on extension evaluation, whereas the
complementary and substitute effects interact with
manufacturing skills transfer to influ ence the extension
evaluations. Overall, consumers favor B
0
P
e
when the
perceived fit between P
0
and P
e
is high. A recent study
validates the importance of category fit after testing three sub-
components of the product category fits (Seltene and Brunel,
2008). Furthermore, a study applies Aaker and Keller’s model
to the brand alliance study and the results support the validity
of the construct as well (James, 2006). The importance of
category fit has been addressed in othe r related areas
including marketing communications (Bridges et al., 2000),
sequence effect of brand extensions (Keller and Aaker, 1992),
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
Journal of Product & Brand Management
19/5 (2010) 317–326
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/10610421011068559]
317
To continue reading
Request your trial