When weaker brands prevail
| Published date | 01 February 2003 |
| Pages | 6-21 |
| Date | 01 February 2003 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420310463108 |
| Author | Fredrik Lange,Sara Selander,Catherine Åberg |
| Subject Matter | Marketing |
When weaker brands prevail
Fredrik Lange, Sara Selander and Catherine A
Êberg
Center for Consumer Marketing, Stockholm School of Economics,
Stockholm, Sweden
Keywords Brand awareness, Consumer behaviour, Product differentiation
Abstract When consumers fulfill consumption goals they make decisions on first, from
which product category to buy, and second, which brand to purchase within the product
category. In this article, the relative effects of product-level typicality and brand-level
typicality on goal-driven consumer choice are examined. Which level of typicality is more
diagnostic of choice? Empirical results show that consumers are, in goal-derived usage
contexts, more likely to choose a less typical and less favored brand from a typical
product category than a typical and more favored brand from a less typical product
category. Consequently, brands that consumers perceive as inferior may be chosen over
superior brands because of the link between product categories and usage contexts. Our
results indicate that it may be fruitful for marketers to associate brands and product
categories with usage contexts, and that they need to consider brand competitors from
other product categories.
Introduction
Different products may fulfill the same consumption goal, e.g. cars, bicycles
and public transportation as ways to get to work, or chocolate bars, cookies
and fruit to satisfy the snack-craving consumer. In many cases, consumers
will consider brands from different nominal product categories when
deciding on the best alternative ± e.g. ``It is really hot today. Shall I choose
an ice-cream or a soft drink?''. For consumers, this implies that they must
make decisions on two levels:
(1) which product will best satisfy their needs; and
(2) which brand to choose within that product category.
For marketers, this implies that they need to know not only how their brand
is perceived, but also how consumers perceive the product category to which
the brand belongs.
In marketing, a vast number of studies focus on issues within the confines of
single product categories. Relatively few studies, however, concern across-
product-category issues, e.g. choice between alternatives from different
product categories (Johnson and Lehmann, 1997). This is rather surprising
considering that many marketers recommend that markets should be defined
from a customer perspective, e.g. consumption goals or needs (cf. Bettman
et al., 1998; Lawson, 1997; Ratneshwar and Shocker, 1991).
The empirical work that has taken consumption goals and across-category
consideration into account has presented interesting findings on consumers'
choice processes, e.g. the use of abstract (non-product) attributes when
discriminating between and evaluating alternatives from different nominal
product categories (Johnson, 1984), and has found that products are
evaluated in terms of their relevance for goal achievement instead of directly
against one another (Bettman and Sujan, 1987; Park and Smith, 1989).
Moreover, as experience grows with certain consumption goals, consumers
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
Few studies concern
across-product-category
issues
6 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 12 NO. 1 2003, pp. 6-21, #MCB UP LIMITED, 1061-0421, DOI 10.1108/10610420310463108
An executive summary for
managers and executive
readers can be found at the
end of this article
consider alternatives from a larger number of product categories (Johnson
and Lehmann, 1997).
Other research has focused on how different nominal product categories are
perceived in consumption goal frameworks, e.g. ``snacks to eat when I do not
have the time to eat breakfast'' or ``snacks to serve at a Friday night party''
(cf. Ratneshwar and Shocker, 1991). A central finding here is that different
nominal product categories are perceived as more or less typical goal
achievers (see also Barsalou, 1985), e.g. potato chips may be more (less)
typical than granola bars as a snack at a Friday night party (when consumers
do not have the time to eat breakfast). Previous research has also found that
typicality and preference are highly associated (cf. Loken and Ward, 1990;
Ratneshwar and Shocker, 1991).
One important aspect, however, that has yet to be investigated concerns how
consumers make brand choices in consumption goal frameworks. We expect
to find typicality effects on goal-driven choice both at product category level
and at brand level. Typical products will most likely be preferred over less
typical products (see above). Also, brands that consumers perceive as typical
in their nominal product category will probably have an advantage over less
typical brands (cf. Carpenter and Nakamoto, 1989; Kapferer, 1997). In this
article, we thus address the effects of brand typicality and product typicality
on goal-driven choice.
We argue that consumers will favor typical brands from typical product
categories. However, it is vital for marketers to investigate the relative
importance that consumers attach to these two decisions in order to gain an
insight into whether less typical brands can compete with more typical
brands if the former are ``compensated'' by belonging to a more typical
nominal product category. In contrast, typical brands in less typical nominal
categories may instead offset the typicality effects at the product-level for
relatively less typical brands.
As typicality is a central theme in cognitive categorization theory (cf.
Barsalou, 1985; Medin, 1989; Ratneshwar and Shocker, 1991), we begin the
article by looking at cognitive categorization and how it may influence
consumer choice. Based on the theoretical framework on categorization we
develop and test empirically a number of hypotheses regarding predictions of
brand choice, brand attitudes, and product category perceptions. The article
concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and managerial implications of
our results and suggestions for further research.
Theoretical framework: categorization
Cognitive categorization is the corner-stone of all human thinking (Smith
and Medin, 1981). It is also fundamental for brand identification and brand
evaluation (Moreau et al., 2001; Sujan and Bettman, 1989). If consumers
were not able to categorize objects they encounter, they would treat
everything as if it were entirely new. Products and brands are stored in
memory in a schema-like manner with associative links from the objects to
appropriate usage contexts (UC), affective and cognitive mind-states, etc.
(cf. Cohen and Basu, 1987).
For our purposes, three advances in cognitive categorization are important:
(1) consumers use different types of categorization for identification of objects,
e.g. brands, and problem solving, e.g. fulfillment of consumption goals;
Typicality and preference
are highly associated
Categorization is corner-
stone of all human thinking
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 12 NO. 1 2003 7
To continue reading
Request your trial