The child–brand relationship: social interactions matter
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-03-2015-0835 |
| Published date | 21 March 2016 |
| Pages | 84-97 |
| Date | 21 March 2016 |
| Author | Angélique Rodhain,Philippe Aurier |
| Subject Matter | Marketing,Product management,Brand management/equity |
The child–brand relationship:
social interactions matter
Angélique Rodhain and Philippe Aurier
Montpellier Research in Management, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to study the child–brand relationship dynamic in interaction with the relationships children develop with
their family, peers and teacher.
Design/methodology/approach – In all, six classes in French primary schools are observed for six months. Among the 112 children observed, aged
10-11 years, 24 of them are interviewed twice individually and 24 others are interviewed in focus groups.
Findings – A lack of coherence between parents, peers and the teacher, as well as with the child’s own desires, affects the child– brand relationship
and reduces the child’s self-esteem. Based on this, this study proposes a four-case typology of child–brand relationship dynamics with two criteria:
the child’s attitude toward the brand relationship (favorable and unfavorable) and the consistency of attitudes in his/her socialization spheres (peers,
parents and teacher) relative to this relationship. Then, the most frequent trajectories children follow across these brand relationship cases are
identified.
Research limitations/implications – This study applies to branded clothes.
Practical implications – From a marketer’s perspective, this study reveals that there are different qualities in child–brand relationships. The
strongest one appears when the child feels free from outside pressure and when peers, parents and the teacher create a virtuous circle for brands
(or at least do not contradict the child’s desires for brands).
Social implications – For public policymakers, it can be useful to be aware that when peers, parents and teachers’ opinions about brands differ,
this affects the child’s self-esteem.
Originality/value – The study offers a dynamic approach to child–brand relationships.
Keywords Self-esteem, Consumer behavior, Qualitative research, Socialization, Children, Social influence, Brand relationships,
Interpretive consumer research
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
“A brand is for showing off. I know it’s just a piece of fabric
sewn onto another one. But since everybody wears brands, we
have to buy them [. . .] ” (Soufiane, 11 years old). This quote
summarizes to what extent brands remain embedded in a
social context: they carry a strong social meaning that allow us
not only to communicate with others but also to propagate
fashion trends through social pressure. More than ever, brands
are now a part of children’s everyday lives, whether in a social
(mostly at school) or private context (at home). Children
understand brand symbolism from as young as three years of
age (McAlister and Cornwell, 2010), allowing them to
attribute status to brands and their owners (Roberts and
Pettigrew, 2013). They associate brand owners with positive
characteristics (Chan, 2006) and, hence, use brands for
self-concept expression (Chaplin and John, 2005) and identity
construction (Elliott and Wattanasuwan, 1998;Nairn et al.,
2008).
Consumer–brand relationships have attracted huge interest
from both academics and practitioners, as is clear from the
many articles published in recent decades. Fournier (1994,
p. 108), a pioneer of the psychological approach to person–
brand relationships, defines the concept as a “voluntary or
imposed interdependence between a person and a brand”,
underlining the need to view it in a psycho-socio-cultural
context. However, her adult-oriented study focuses mainly on
the psychological person–brand relationship. This is also true
of Ji (2002,2008), who adapted the concept to the case of
children. However, by focusing on the consumer–brand dyad,
these researchers overlook the complexity of social
interactions that surround this relationship.
If a brand relationship can be imposed, as stated by Ji (2008)
and Fournier (1998), then who imposes it? Parents? Peers? Are
children under pressure to establish this relationship? Do they in
turn exert pressure? Are they subjected to contradictory or
converging influences? And of particular importance, in the
context of school, is how these games of influence take place and
the role played by teachers. Answers to these questions would
help us understand what happens to brands in a place that they
do not master, given that legislation in most countries prohibits
or at least limits advertising in schools. The results should make
a social contribution at a time when UNICEF (2011) has
indicated materialism to be a policy issue of great importance, in
particular through children’s symbolic use of brands either to
confer superior status or to avoid bullying (UNICEF, 2011,
p. 2).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
Journal of Product & Brand Management
25/1 (2016) 84–97
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/JPBM-03-2015-0835]
84
To continue reading
Request your trial