The effect of brand authenticity on consumer–brand relationships
| Pages | 231-241 |
| Date | 11 March 2019 |
| Published date | 11 March 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-09-2017-1567 |
| Author | Hyunjoo Oh,Paulo Henrique Muller Prado,Jose Carlos Korelo,Francielle Frizzo |
| Subject Matter | Marketing,Product management,Brand management/equity |
The effect of brand authenticity on
consumer–brand relationships
Hyunjoo Oh
Department of Marketing, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA, and
Paulo Henrique Muller Prado, Jose Carlos Korelo and Francielle Frizzo
Department of Business Administration, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to explore the impact of brand authenticity on forming self- reinforcing assets (enticing-the-self, enriching-the-self and
enabling-the-self), which subsequently influence the brand-self connectedness and consumers’behavioral intentions.
Design/methodology/approach –The authors surveyed 347 consumers in the USA and Brazil and used structural equatio n modeling to test the
relationship among brand authenticity, self-reinforcing assets, brand-self connectedness and behavioral intentions.
Findings –Brand authenticity was found to influence the self-reinforcing assets. In turn, the self-reinforcing assets promoted closeness toward the brand,
thereby increasing the behavioral intentions of consumersto buy a product, visit a store/website in the future and recommend the brand to other people.
Practical implications –Marketing practitioners can use these results to promote better brand positioning by considering brand authenticity as a
key factor in how consumers cognitively assess brands.
Originality/value –This paper shows that brand authenticity is a key antecedent of consumer–brand self-reinforcing assets.
Keywords Brand authenticity, Brand-self connectedness, Consumers’behavioral intentions, Self-reinforcing assets
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In the postmodern market, characterized by uncertainty,
pluralism and excessive consumption, consumers are exposed
to a flood of products and brands in their everyday purchasing
experiences. In such excessivebrand proliferation, creating and
maintaining strong relationships with consumers is one of the
major challenges in strategic brand management. One way to
strengthen consumer–brandrelationships is to associate brand-
specific characteristics with consumers’aspirations, thereby
strengthening brand identities. In this process, authenticity is
an essential human aspiration (Bruhn et al., 2012) and has
become an increasingly desirable characteristic in a brand
(Beverland and Farrelly, 2010). Defined in terms of what is
genuine, real and true (Newman and Dhar, 2014), brand
authenticity not only is a decision-making criterionthat guides
consumers’choice of brands but also helps consumers define
and construct who they are by expressing their authentic selves
(Arnould and Price, 2000;Beverland and Farrelly, 2010;Liao
and Ma, 2009;Morhart et al., 2015). Consumers’increasing
desire for authenticity in products, brands and experiences
highlights the importance of understanding the role of brand
authenticityin developing consumer–brand relationships.
Seeking to shed light on how brand authenticity influences
consumer–brand relationship s, the present study aims to test
brand authenticity as a key determinant of the 3Es self-
reinforcing assets (enticing-the-self, enriching-the-self and
enabling-the-self) described by Park et al. (2013).Park et al.’s
(2013) attachment–aversion (AA) relatio nship model
explains how these t ypes of brand assets build the consu mer–
brand relationshi p. Some brands help co nsumers obtain
aesthetic or sensory pleasure: enticing-the-self. Other brands
enable consumers to control their environment by creating a
sense of an efficacious and capable self: enabling-the-self.
Some brands offer enr ichment of self thro ugh the
symbolic communication of values that resonate with
consumers: enriching-the-self. In their model, the extent to
whichabrandpossessesthese3Esassetspromotesself-brand
connectedness and consequently increases consumers’
behavioral inten tions toward the brand.
Although Park et al.’s (2013) AA relationship model
delineates important internal mechanisms that develop self-
brand relationship, the lack of specificity regarding marketing
activities has been criticized (Schmitt, 2013). In particular,
Schmitt (2013) criticizes that the psychological model of
internal constructsand processes neither specifically predict the
determinants of the relationship nor specify the brand
components that stimulateself-reinforcement. He argues that it
is important to identify which aspect of brand is set to
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
28/2 (2019) 231–241
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/JPBM-09-2017-1567]
The authorswould like to thank ProfessorElder Semprebon of Universidade
Federal do Paraná and Professor Juliana Medeiros of Pontifícia
UniversidadeCat
olica doParaná for their assistancewith data collection.
The authors contributed equally to this work.
Received 9 September 2017
Revised 5 February 2018
10 March 2018
Accepted 12 March 2018
231
To continue reading
Request your trial