This paper examines situations in which brand extensions are more or less likely to dilute beliefs associated with the family brand name. The results of an experimental investigation indicate that dilution effects do occur when brand extension attributes are inconsistent with the family brand beliefs. However, they are less likely to emerge when consumers perceive the brand extension as atypical of the family brand, and typicality of the brand extension is salient at the time beliefs are assessed. These findings held regardless of brand extension category, with the extension category being either the same or different from those product categories already occupied by the family brand, but differing by the type of family brand belief involved. Results are discussed in terms of the conditions under which two alternative theoretical perspectives (“bookkeeping” versus “typicality-based” models) are supported.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AakerDavid A., and KellerKevin Lane (1990), “Consumer Response to Brand Extension,”Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), 27–41.
2.
AndersonNorman H., and JacobsonA. (1965), “Effect of Stimulus Inconsistency and Discounting Instructions in Personality Impression Formation,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 531–39.
3.
BarsalouLawrence (1985), “Ideals, Central Tendency, and Frequency of Instantiation as Determinants of Graded Structure in Categories,”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 12 (1), 116–34.
4.
BoushDavid, and LokenBarbara (1991), “A Process Tracing Study of Brand Extension Evaluation,”Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (February), 16–28.
5.
BoushDavid, ShippShannon, LokenBarbara, GencturkEzra, CrockettSusan, KennedyEllen, MinshallBetty, MisurellDennis, RochfordLinda, and StrobelJon (1987), “Affect Generalization to Similar and Dissimilar Line Extensions,”Psychology and Marketing, 4 (Fall), 225–41.
6.
CrockerJennifer (1981), “Judgment of Covariation by Social Perceivers,”Psychological Bulletin, 90 (September), 272–92.
7.
CrockerJennifer, HannahDarlene B., and WeberRenee (1983), “Person Memory and Causal Attributions,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 55–66.
8.
FiskeSusan T., and PavelchakMark A. (1986), “Category-Based Versus Piecemeal-Based Affective Responses: Developments in Schema-Triggered Affect,” in The Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundation of Social Behavior, SorrentinoRichard W., and Tony HigginsE., eds. New York: Guilford Press, 167–203.
9.
GibsonRichard (1990), “The End of the Line? Overkill on Extensions,”Wall Street Journal, June 18, B1.
10.
KellerKevin, and AakerDavid A. (1992), “The Effects of Sequential Introduction of Brand Extensions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (February), 35–50.
11.
LokenBarbara, and WardJames (1990), “Alternative Approaches to Understanding the Determinants of Typicality,”Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (September), 111–26.
12.
LynchJohn G.Jr., and OfirChezy (1989), “Effects of Cue Consistency and Value on Base-Rate Utilization,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56 (February), 170–81.
13.
Meyers-LevyJoan, and TyboutAlice M. (1989), “Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation,”Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (June), 39–54.
14.
ParkBernadette, and HastieReid (1987), “Perception of Variability in Category Development: Instance-Versus Abstraction-Based Stereotypes,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53 (October), 621–35.
15.
RomeoJean B. (1991), “The Effect of Negative Information on the Evaluations of Brand Extensions and the Family Brand,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18, HolmanRebecca H., and SolomonMichael R., eds. Association for Consumer Research, 399–406.
16.
RoschEleanor, and MervisCarolyn (1975), “Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structures of Categories,”Cognitive Psychology, 7 (October), 573–605.
17.
RothbartMyron, and LewisScott (1988), “Inferring Category Attributes From Exemplar Attributes: Geometric Shapes and Social Categories,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55 (December), 861–72.
18.
SherifMusaf, and HovlandC. I. (1961), Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects and Their Relationship to Subsequent Behavior.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19.
SujanMita, and DeklevaChristine (1987), “Product Categorization and Inference-Making: Some Implications for Comparative Advertising,”Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (December) 372–78.
20.
SujanMita, and BettmanJames (1989), “The Effects of Brand Positioning Strategies on Consumers’ Brand and Category Perceptions: Some Insights from Consumer Research,”Journal of Marketing Research, 26 (November), 454–67.
21.
TauberEdward M. (1988), “Brand Leverage: Strategy for Growth in a Cost-Controlled World,”Journal of Advertising Research, 28 (August-September), 26–30.
22.
WeberRenee, and CrockerJennifer (1983), “Cognitive Processes in the Revision of Stereotypic Beliefs,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 (November), 961–77.
23.
WyerRobert S. (1970), “Information Redundancy, Inconsistency and Novelty and their Role in Impression Formation,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6 (January), 111–27.
