The measurement and dimensionality of brand associations

Abstract

The purpose of the research reported here was to test empirically a conceptualization of brand associations that consists of three dimensions: brand image, brand attitude and perceived quality. A better understanding of brand associations is needed to facilitate further theoretical development and practical measurement of the construct. Three studies were conducted to: test a protocol for developing product category specific measures of brand image; investigate the dimensionality of the brand associations construct; and explore whether the degree of dimensionality of brand associations varies depending upon a brand's familiarity. Findings confirm the efficacy of the brand image protocol and indicate that brand associations differ across brands and product categories. The latter finding supports the conclusion that brand associations for different products should be measured using different items. As predicted, dimensionality of brand associations was found to be influenced by brand familiarity.

The effect of social media communication on consumer perceptions of brands

“…This scale measures the added value of a branded product in comparison with an unbranded good with the same characteristics. Brand attitude was measured using three items adapted from the works of Low and Jr (2000) and Villarejo-Ramos and Sánchez-Franco (2005). Purchase intention was measured using three items adapted from the research of Yoo, Donthu, and Lee (2000) and Shukla (2011).…”

“…Substantial empirical research indicates that brand attitude influences customer evaluations of brands (Aaker and Keller 1990;Low and Lamb Jr 2000). Therefore, extensions of brand awareness and positive associations should generate greater revenues and savings in marketing costs and should thus create higher profits than those of less liked brands (Keller 2013).…”

Green approaches in Hong Kong’s fast-food restaurants and its effects on corporate image

“…Hence, corporate image is delineated as the experiences, impressions, beliefs, feelings and knowledge of people, which are apparently branding efforts (Low and Lamb, 2000) [48]. Measures of corporate image are as contentious as the concept.…”

The Balance Between the Transmitted and the Perceived Image of Luxury Fragrance Brands

“…While some authors have defended the use of the former (Gardner & Levy, 1955;Durgee & Stuart, 1987;Danes, Hess, Story, & Vorst, 2012), others have opted for the latter, and the majority of authors have suggested the use of mixed techniques for image studies, combining qualitative and quantitative tools during the different study phases (Churchill, 1979;Zaichkowsky, 1985;Sanz de la Tajada, 1994;Low & Lamb, 2000;Del Rio, Vazquez, & Iglesias, 2001;Martinez & De Chernatony, 2004;Dolnicar & Grün, 2007;Koubaa, 2008;Park, 2009;Huang, 2010); (2) Although there are scales that allow for the measurement of partial dimensions of brand image, there is yet to be an agreement on a standard set of attributes; that is, items to be included in a scale for measuring the overall image of any type of brand, regardless of the specific brand product category; (3) Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) summed up the process that is typically followed when studying brand image using combined qualitative and quantitative instruments. Once again, the lack of agreement as to a specific technique and measurement scale is evident.…”

“…However, based on this multi-dimensional brand image perspective, no standardized and universally accepted methodology has been established that would allow for the image measurement in any activity market or sector (Low & Lamb, 2000;Stern et al, 2001). This raises three issues:…”