Cultural value, consumption value, and global brand image: A cross‐national study

Abstract

In expanding their market to the global level with clear and consistent global brand images across nations, marketers are ever confronting the issue of how to deal with different cultural values. Cultural value is identified as an influential factor on brand image and is widely accepted as one of the crucial concepts in understanding consumer consumption value, which determines choices of consuming everyday products and services. Most firms endeavoring to establish and maintain consistent global brand images, however, adopt a standardized brand image strategy that usually does not consider individual target markets' characteristics, including the concepts of cultural value and consumption value. This study developed a conceptual framework which incorporated cultural value not only as a direct antecedent of brand image, but also as an indirect antecedent of brand image through consumption value, and empirically tested it using the category of apparel. Following this framework, this study hypothesized the differences in brand image, cultural value, and consumption value between the U.S. and South Korea. Data were gathered through surveying university students residing in the San Francisco and Seoul metropolitan areas using a convenience sampling method. A total of 329 completed questionnaires were used in factor analysis, discriminant analysis, and structural equation

Validation of a Fashion Brand Image Scale Capturing Cognitive, Sensory, and Affective Associations: Testing Its Role in an Extended Brand Equity Model

“…Brand image has been discussed as an important concept in marketing since the 1950s; however, there is a lack of consensus regarding the conceptualization of brand image and its measurement (Dobni & Zinkhan, 1990;Keller, 1993;Park & Rabolt, 2009;Stern, Zinkhan, & Jaju, 2001). As noted, marketing research has emphasized the cognitive dimension of brand image.…”

“…Convergent validity (Park & Rabolt, 2009); discriminant validity (Lassar et al, 1995;Low & Lamb, 2000); and convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity (Ismail & Spinelli, 2012) have been evaluated for four of the eight scales. Relationships among variables have only been tested for the remaining four scales (Chang & Chieng, 2006;Esch et al, 2006, Faircloth et al, 2001Kim et al, 2003).…”

“…Lassar et al (1995) gauged congruity with the respondent's personality. Park and Rabolt (2009) assessed a brand's product-related attributes (e.g., trendy/outdated, sexy/unappealing, romantic/practical).…”

“…These researchers have focused mainly on cognitive dimensions (e.g., Esch et al, 2006;Ismail & Spinelli, 2012;Kim, Kim, & An, 2003;Lassar, Mittal, & Sharma, 1995;Park & Rabolt, 2009) and, to a lesser extent, affective dimensions of brand image (e.g., Esch et al, 2006). Consequently, existing brand image scales have focused on cognitive dimensions.…”

Breaking Through Complexity: Visual and Conceptual Dimensions in Logo Evaluation across Exposures

“…Because they are used in multiple media and are crucial depositaries for brand associations, logos have specific features compared to other visual marketing stimuli (Maxian, Bradley, Wise, & Toulouse, ; Park & Rabolt, ). On the one hand, they have often small dimensions and therefore a finite surface that should fit in disparate communication media (e.g., business cards, packages, ads, social networks, and Web sites).…”