Brand experience is conceptualized as sensations, feelings, cognitions, and behavioral responses evoked by brand-related stimuli that are part of a brand's design and identity, packaging, communications, and environments. The authors distinguish several experience dimensions and construct a brand experience scale that includes four dimensions: sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral. In six studies, the authors show that the scale is reliable, valid, and distinct from other brand measures, including brand evaluations, brand involvement, brand attachment, customer delight, and brand personality. Moreover, brand experience affects consumer satisfaction and loyalty directly and indirectly through brand personality associations. However, a conceptualization and scale for measuring brand experiences has not yet been developed. In addition, research has studied contexts in which specific product and service experiences arise (Arnould, Price, and Zinkhan 2002). However, research has largely ignored the exact nature and dimensional structure of brand experiences.Notably, brand experience has attracted a lot of attention in marketing practice. Marketing practitioners have come to realize that understanding how consumers experience brands is critical for developing marketing strategies for goods and services. Many trade writings have appeared that present useful concepts as well as some ad hoc experience measurements (Chattopadhyay and Laborie 2005;Pine and Gilmore 1999;Schmitt 1999Schmitt , 2003Shaw and Ivens 2002;Smith and Wheeler 2002).In this article, we present both a conceptual analysis of brand experience and a brand experience scale. As with other brand research, the development of a brand experience scale must go hand-in-hand with conceptual development of the construct itself. We need to identify the underlying dimensions of brand experience (analogous to the "Big Five" dimensions of brand personality or the dimensions of affection, connection, and passion that make up brand attachment) and develop a scale that can measure the strength with which a brand evokes each experience dimension. However, the experience construct is not as clearly associated with one particular basic discipline (e.g., psychology) as other brand constructs are. For example, brand personality and brand attachment have been defined on the basis of equivalent concepts in personality and developmental psychology; as a result, the development of scale items was relatively straightforward. In contrast, writing on experience can be found in a wide range of fields, including marketing, philosophy, cognitive science, and management practice. Therefore, we must clearly conceptualize our construct and develop scale items based on this conceptualization.To define and conceptualize the brand experience construct, we begin with a review of consumer and marketing research, which examines when experiences occur and how they affect judgments, attitudes, and other aspects of consumer behavior. Next, we review the literature in philosophy, cognitiv...

Brand experience is conceptualized as sensations, feelings, cognitions, and behavioral responses evoked by brand-related stimuli that are part of a brand's design and identity, packaging, communications, and environments. The authors distinguish several experience dimensions and construct a brand experience scale that includes four dimensions: sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral. In six studies, the authors show that the scale is reliable, valid, and distinct from other brand measures, including brand evaluations, brand involvement, brand attachment, customer delight, and brand personality. Moreover, brand experience affects consumer satisfaction and loyalty directly and indirectly through brand personality associations.

Purpose\ud – This study aims to investigate the nature of brand hate, its antecedents and its outcomes.\ud \ud Design/methodology/approach\ud – The authors conduct two quantitative studies in Europe. In Study 1, a measure of brand hate is developed and its effects are tested on behavioral outcomes. In Study 2, the authors show how brand hate and its behavioral outcomes change depending on the reasons for brand hate.\ud \ud Findings\ud – The study conceptualizes brand hate as a constellation of negative emotions which is significantly associated with different negative behavioral outcomes, including complaining, negative WOM, protest and patronage reduction/cessation. Reasons for brand hate related to corporate wrongdoings and violation of expectations are associated with “attack-like” and “approach-like” strategies, whereas reasons related to taste systems are associated with “avoidance-like” strategies.\ud \ud Research limitations/implications\ud – The study views brand hate as an affective phenomenon occurring at a point in time. Researchers could adopt a wider perspective by looking at the phenomenon of hate as a disposition/sentiment, not merely as an emotion. They could also adopt a longitudinal perspective to understand how brand hate develops over time and relate it to brand love.\ud \ud Practical implications\ud – The authors’ conceptualization of brand hate offers insights to companies about how to resist and prevent brand hate for one’s own brand.\ud \ud Originality/value\ud – The study provides a first conceptualization of brand hate and develops a scale for measuring it. The authors relate this conceptualization and measurement of brand hate to important behavioral outcomes and different types of antecedents

No abstract

We comment on Gilovich and colleagues' program of research on happiness resulting from experiential versus material purchases, and critique these authors' interpretation that people derive more happiness from experiences than from material possessions. Unlike goods, experiences cannot be purchased, and possessions versus experiences do not seem to form the endpoints of the same continuum. As an alternative, we present a consumer-experience model that views materialism and experientialism as two separate dimensions whose effects on consumer happiness, both in the form of pleasure and in the form of meaning, depend on the type of brand experiences evoked. Thus, a good life in a consumerist society means integrating material and experiential consumptions rather than shifting spending from material to experiential purchases.