2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.12.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new measure of brand personality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
411
0
12

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 447 publications
(450 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
8
411
0
12
Order By: Relevance
“…Because personality characteristics are bipolar (i.e., someone can be either very friendly, or not at all friendly), the antonym of each personality trait was also provided, making up a list of 88 items (Table 2). This is in line with Anouk, et al [11] and Geuens, et al [25], so that participants could check all that apply from the whole list, including opposite terms. …”
Section: Brand Personality Trait Selectionsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…Because personality characteristics are bipolar (i.e., someone can be either very friendly, or not at all friendly), the antonym of each personality trait was also provided, making up a list of 88 items (Table 2). This is in line with Anouk, et al [11] and Geuens, et al [25], so that participants could check all that apply from the whole list, including opposite terms. …”
Section: Brand Personality Trait Selectionsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…26 The Jones scale, similar to the Aaker scale, is composed of fi ve major dimensions: ' Responsibility ' , ' Activity ' , ' Emotionality ' , ' Aggressiveness ' and ' Simplicity ' .…”
Section: Research Methodology Questionnairementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aggressiveness. The results indicated that aggressiveness was significantly associated with attitudes (c path β = -.41, p < .05) which is also unsurprising as banking and health services can be considered as conservative and therefore any display of aggression by the brand is likely to negatively impact attitudes (Guens et al, 2009 significant. There was a significant inverse association between aggressiveness and behavioural intentions (β = -.60, p = .002), which attenuated and was not significant in the presence of the BPA dimensions (β = -.22, p = .21).…”
Section: ])mentioning
confidence: 99%