دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی چگونگی ارتباط بین محصولات و عدد در برندها و تاثیر آن بر نگرش های مصرف کننده - اشپرینگر 2018

Abstract

Drawing on numerical cognition research, we identify a set of multi-context numbers (MCN) that originate from the decimal (10), duodecimal (12) and sexagesimal (60) numeral systems frequently used in numerous domains (e.g., 10, 12, 20, 24, 60, 360, 100). We propose and show that inclusion of MCN in alphanumeric brand names (ABN) generates more favorable consumer attitudes and higher preferences for product extensions in different domains. We examine three types of fit, between (1) parent brands and numbers, (2) product categories and numbers and (3) parent brands and product categories. We find that the effects of ABN numbers are mainly mediated by product–number associations. Accordingly, while some numbers that are strongly associated with the product category (e.g., 401 and retirement services) or the parent brand (e.g., Heinz and 57; Levi’s and 501) or that are familiar to consumers (e.g., 18, 21) generate favorable consumer responses in specific contexts, the same numbers fail in other product domains (e.g., 401/57/18/21 taxi service). In four empirical studies, we demonstrate that MCN in ABN can achieve and maintain favorable consumer responses and receive higher preferences than other very familiar numbers in various product extension contexts, regardless of parent brand names or product categories. Our findings suggest that it is ideal to use MCN in new extensions.

Discussion

Our examination of preferences for MCN in the absence of a fit between brand names and product categories enabled us to gain important insights into which numbers might be more effective when naming brand extensions. We observed that using a number highly associated with a brand name was not the best strategy when extending to an unrelated domain (e.g., BR31 ketchups). Overall, consumer preferences seemed to be driven by product–number associations as opposed to brand name–number associations. More interestingly, although MCN (e.g., BR100) did not have the highest product–number association, they were able to achieve the highest choice share. This result suggests that when extending to a far product category, firms can effectively use MCN brands because MCN are preferred over numbers that have stronger associations with the product category (e.g., BR57 ketchup) or the brand name (e.g., BR31 ketchup). Note that in this study we purposefully used a product category that was incongruent with the brand name (i.e., BR and ketchup), and this enabled us to tease out the effects of product–number and brand–number fit. Our next step is to extend our investigation of fit to simultaneously examine the underlying roles of brand name–product, brand name–number and product– number associations for the effects of MCN and non-MCN on consumer attitudes.