Decoding service brand image through user-generated images

Abstract

Purpose Despite the growing number of studies surrounding user-generated content (UGC), understanding of the implications, potential and pertinence of user-generated images (UGI), the visual form of UGC, on brand image in services is limited. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the concept and a comprehensive framework of image word of mouth (IWOM), which identifies UGI as visual articulations of service experiences that result in consumer judgment of service brand image. The framework takes a consumer-focussed approach and covers key branding issues relevant to services marketers such as identifying and linking valued services dimensions, made evident through IWOM, to ideas and thoughts inferred by consumers (viewers) of the brand image and consequent consumer intentions. Design/methodology/approach The paper reviews and synthesises current services, marketing and branding literature surrounding electronic word of mouth (WOM) and UGC, where it highlights the need to consider interpretations of UGI as persuasive forms of visual WOM or IWOM, as well as a critical stimuli of brand image. Findings The paper illuminates the importance of adopting a visual perspective that applies constructs developed in cognitive psychology, to decode how viewers (consumers) interact and form associations of brand image via IWOM. Originality/value The paper examines, integrates and adds to extant literature surrounding WOM, UGC, visual images and brand image within services.

Understanding the role of image, quality and price for developing prestigious mass brands

“…Further, the logistic regression results reveal that brand image had an increased chance compared to quality and price to influence brand revitalisation as masstige. This finding fills the gap in the literature looking for answers to the question about what dominant attribute is needed for brand revitalisation (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018; Bakri et al. , 2020; Barreda et al.…”

How Does Service Climate Influence Hotel Employees’ Brand Citizenship Behavior? A Social Exchange and Social Identity Perspective

“…Brand image refers to a “set of beliefs held about a particular brand” (Kotler, 1988, p. 197). Brand image is also defined as a set of associations and feelings customers hold of a particular brand (Bakri et al, 2020). Traditionally, marketing researchers have used brand image from a customer perspective to understand how customers perceive and evaluate a particular brand in the market.…”

“…Traditionally, marketing researchers have used brand image from a customer perspective to understand how customers perceive and evaluate a particular brand in the market. Positive brand image is associated with customers’ trust on the brand and customers’ purchase intentions (Bakri et al, 2020; Lien et al, 2015). However, as employees play a crucial role in constructing and conveying brand image, especially in hospitality and service industries (Burmann & Zeplin, 2005), researchers have emphasized the perceived brand image from an employee perspective (Kimpakorn & Tocquer, 2009; Todd & Kent, 2009).…”

The Effect of User-Generated Image Pixel Quality on User Experience: A Scenario-Based Experiment in Social Media

“…Among all kinds of social media content, one type of information is worthy of further research: image. Consumers are inclined to view photograph to get the first impression of products for a short period, which is an effective avenue of tangibilizing intangible experience [1]. Users share them in social media to self-projecting and self-branding [1,[13][14][15].…”

“…Consumers are inclined to view photograph to get the first impression of products for a short period, which is an effective avenue of tangibilizing intangible experience [1]. Users share them in social media to self-projecting and self-branding [1,[13][14][15]. The implication of UGI not only facilitate other users to comprehend product-related experience, but also help marketer to unlock users' intangible, subjective and ultimately personal user experience [2,16].…”