Cognitive and Affective Reactions of U.S. Consumers to Global Brands

Abstract

The authors find that U.S. consumers hold contradictory notions of what characterizes a global brand beyond its wide recognition, availability, and standardization across markets. In particular, they find that the association of brand globality with higher quality is not as strong as the literature has proposed and that affect directly influences how people perceive global brands. The initial results imply that previous research on globality effects may have confounded brand globality and brand strength and that the latter is responsible for the quality effect. A follow-up study shows that for most consumers, brand globality is associated with positive affect and that this affect is also reflected among consumers who are explicitly against global brands. The authors conclude that response to global brands is driven more by affect and less by cognition.Marketing and brand managers in companies whose market offerings span multiple cultures and borders are faced with the difficult task of coordinating resources and strategies to serve broad global markets profitably. In addition to this challenge, many are unsure about what the globality of their brands means to their consumers or even whether this globality is a brand attribute that should be mentioned or perhaps concealed in marketing communications. Academic research on the topic is modestly informative. Several recent studies have provided some evidence of a positive relationship between the perceived globality of a brand and its perceptions of quality (Holt, Quelch, and Taylor 2004), prestige (Steenkamp, Batra, and Alden 2003), and esteem (Johansson and Ronkainen 2004). Even when other factors are controlled for, researchers have argued that this global brand effect influences brand purchase intentions through higher quality and status ratings (Steenkamp, Batra, and Alden 2003).What the global brand effect actually consists of is still unclear. Holt, Quelch, and Taylor (2004) suggest two important factors, global myth and social responsibility, whereas others suggest cosmopolitanism and the desire to belong to a global community (Alden, Steenkamp, and Batra 1999;Kapferer 1997). Attractive as such benefits might be, it is difficult to find evidence that consumers actually consider globality as captured by these dimensions in their marketplace choices. There is strong evidence that individual consumers in developing countries choose global brands regardless of merit for conspicuous consumption or aspirational reasons (Batra et al. 2000;Holt, Quelch, and Taylor 2004). In more mature markets, however, it is likely that "the consumer does not buy a global brand per se, but on the contrary, individualistic

Implicit measures of consumer cognition: A review

“…In a study employing a nationally representative panel of respondents recruited via the Internet, who presumably had no self-presentation motives, the only explanation for the favorable behavioral effect that global brands engendered (i.e., higher purchase levels than attitude-behavior consistency models would predict) was that U.S. consumers harbor positive implicit attitudes toward global brands. Indeed, an indirect test showed that an individual described along several attributes was liked better if presented as a global (vs. local) beer drinker, whereas an IAT uncovered implicit associations favoring global over local brands (Dimofte, Johansson, & Ronkainen, 2008).…”

“…1 For example, if consumers have positive attitudes toward global brands, being exposed to globality information associated with a well-known brand like McDonald's may improve attitudes toward the brand and purchase likelihood (Dimofte, Johansson, & Ronkainen, 2008). However, an alternative, constructionist view of attitudes argues that consumers may in fact create attitudes toward global brands "on the spot" in a particular context (in other words, consumers may infer their attitudes from observing the ambient stimuli in a salient context and recalling their past behavior in such contexts; see Wilson & Hodges, 1992).…”

“…The largely positive behavioral response that American consumers have toward global brands was the focus of research by Dimofte, Johansson, and Ronkainen (2008). Unlike respondents in developing nations, who display an explicit preference for these brands due to their aspirational nature, U.S. consumers reported seeing no particular benefit or value associated with global brands (be they American or foreign).…”

Determinants of the Success of Global and Local Brands in Latin America

“…It is especially important in certain product categories (e.g., alcoholic beverages, cereals, credit cards, clothing, fast food restaurants, jewelry and accessories, sportswear, tobacco), whose brands target worldwide segments of consumers, such as the teenager and affluent segments (Chu & Huang, 2010;Hassan & Katsanis, 1991;Strizhakova, Coulter, & Price, 2012). In many product categories, perceived brand globalness could create consumer perceptions of brand superiority (Dahan & Peltekoglua, 2011;Dimofte, Johansson, & Ronkainen, 2008;Kapferer, 2004;Shocker, Srivastava, & Ruekert, 1994;Strizhakova, Coulter, & Price, 2011).…”

Identidade de marca-país: comunicação da marca Brasil nos Estados Unidos da América

“…Brasil dirigindo sua investigação para um mercado mais maduro (DIMOFTE; JOHANSSON; RONKAINEN, 2008), ou seja, em um país consumidor de turismo internacional reconhecido.…”