Copy Alert: A Method and Metric to Detect Visual Copycat Brands

Abstract

The authors propose a method and metric to quantify the consumer confusion between leading brands and copycat brands that results from the visual similarity of their packaging designs. The method has three components. First, image processing techniques establish the objective similarity of the packages of leading and copycat brands on the basis of their colors and textures. Second, a perceptual decision task (triangle test) assesses the accuracy and speed with which consumers can identify differences between brands from rapidly (300 milliseconds) flashed images of their packages. Third, a competing accumulator model describes the buildup of evidence on each of the alternative brands during consumers’ perceptual decisions and predicts the accuracy and response time of brand identification. Jointly, these components establish the impact of copycat packaging's visual features on consumer confusion. The method is applied in a test of experimentally designed copycats and market copycats in 15 product categories. A three-tiered metric (“copy alert,” “copy watch,” and “copy safe”) establishes the extent to which copycat brands imitate the package designs of target brands and identifies which visual features are responsible.

A typology of brand counterfeiting and imitation based on a semiotic approach

“…This research complements the contribution by Satomura et al (2014) on similarity of copycats by proposing a rationale for developing stimuli in a controlled manner through objective variations along the two dimensions of the typology.…”

“…Results show that consumers, while conscious of an imitation strategy, consider meaning imitation as "more acceptable and less unfair" (Van Horen & Pieters, 2012a, p. 247). Recently, Satomura et al (2014) proposed a new method and metric to detect a copycat from a leader brand, based on consumer's visual judgments and established the impact of copycat packaging visual features on consumer's confusion.…”

“…The present research differs from Satomura et al (2014) as it aims at proposing a conceptual framework based on objective characteristics of product, thanks to a definition of brand from semiotics. The semiotic theoretical background permits to specify independent levels on which to create objective variations in stimuli, in a systematic and controlled manner, and to build a typology of stimuli.…”

“…This practice is widespread: half of the store brands in national US supermarkets imitates a leader brand package at least in color, size and shape (Scott-Morton & Zettelmeyer, 2004). Two thirds of shoppers report that imitations confused them, one third admits being fouled by similar packaging (Satomura, Wedel, & Pieters, 2014). Counterfeiting and imitation threaten hard-won competitive positions, dilute brand equity and undermine the status associated with products.…”

Private Label Imitation of a National Brand: Implications for Consumer Choice and Law

“…Postchoice questions (e.g., prior brand experience) would then be used to assess the likelihood of confusion. Recently, eye tracking data have been proposed to study brand confusion (Satomura, Wedel, and Pieters 2014).…”