The Interplay of Brand, Brand Origin and Brand User Stereotypes in Forming Value Perceptions

Abstract

Although the importance of various brand-related stereotypes held by consumers has been acknowledged in the marketing literature, their interplay has not yet been considered. We derive four alternative theoretical models of the relationships between brand, brand origin and brand user stereotypes and their effects on consumers' value perceptions. The four models are subsequently tested on two nationally representative samples in Germany and Serbia, respectively. The best-performing model in both studies predicts that brand origin and brand user stereotypes act as complementary drivers of the brand stereotype. In turn, value perceptions mediate the positive impact of the brand stereotype on purchase intent. This investigation is the first to: (a) juxtapose and empirically assess alternative theoretical perspectives on the interplay of brand-related stereotypes; (b) reveal the combined influence of multiple stereotypes on consumers' value perceptions and through them, on intentions to buy the brand; (c) determine the relative influence of distinct stereotype content dimensions (i.e. warmth vs. competence) on consumers' perceptions of value; and (d) highlight the extent to which the interplay among different stereotypes in influencing consumer outcomes is stable across different market settings. Implications of the findings are considered and future research directions identified.

A systematic literature review of the stereotype content model in the fields of psychology and marketing: main themes examined in the literature and an agenda for future research in marketing

“…Due to the context, time, or situation, individuals might infer higher warmth from highly competent professionals, lower competence from highly warm providers, etc. Hence, these two premises need to be considered when examining stereotypes in specific countries ( Diamantopoulos et al, 2021 ; Gidaković et al, 2022 ), industries, for vulnerable groups, and considering recent changes in current stereotypes (e.g., sexual identities, racial stereotypes, migrant circumstances such as refugees, etc.).…”

“…Recent scholars in marketing that have used the SCM have mentioned the need for further research in this field ( Leung et al, 2023 ; Pizzi et al, 2023 ; Ren et al, 2023 ). The authors indicated that, while the influence of the two main traits has been more widely studied in psychology, more research is needed to uncover how these traits influence consumers’ decision-making ( Kolbl et al, 2019 , 2020 ; Diamantopoulos et al, 2021 ; Gidaković et al, 2022 ) and behavior in the market ( Halkias and Diamantopoulos, 2020 ; Pizzi et al, 2023 ). Following this need for research, in the present study, we first take a closer look at prior findings in marketing and consumer behavior.…”

“…While there is a wide variety of topics examined in the literature, there are two main fields where most prior studies have been conducted, namely, in psychology (e.g., Imhoff et al, 2013 ; Vervecken et al, 2015 ; Meyer and Asbrock, 2018 ; Grigoryev et al, 2019 ; Xue et al, 2020 ; Brender-Ilan and Reizer, 2021 ; Gärtner et al, 2022 ; Linne et al, 2022 ) and marketing (e.g., Kolbl et al, 2019 , 2020 ; Diamantopoulos et al, 2021 ; Gidaković et al, 2022 ). In fact, prior research in marketing on the SCM uses the main theoretical basis of research in social psychology, connecting prior research from these two fields.…”

“…Among these, recent authors have mentioned the emerging interest among scholars in the SCM and its implications for the fields of marketing ( Ren et al, 2023 ) and consumer research ( Leung et al, 2023 ). The recent interest among scholars in marketing and the amount of research conducted (see Gidaković et al, 2022 ) leads to a need to synthesize prior findings in this field. Following this need for research, in the present study, we first (1) provide an overview of research in psychology subfields, which form the basis of the SCM, and next, (2) we take a closer look at prior findings in marketing.…”

Cultural congruity and extensions of corporate heritage brands: An empirical analysis of time‐honored brands in China

“…Considering abstract cultural values embedded in corporate heritage brands (Balmer, 2011; Urde et al, 2007), we expect that shared cultural schema is not only associated with conceptual fluency but also relates to the perception of fit in the form of abstract traits and entities associated with the culturally charged brands and their extensions (Gidaković et al, 2022; Torelli et al, 2012). Because of the shared representations of stereotypical entities surrounding the culture‐product domain, we propose that the more salience and cultural congruity there are between the corporate heritage brand and the new extension category, the greater is the perception of fit.…”