Similarities of brand images with self images were tested to determine differences between (a) most preferred and least preferred brands, (b) socially consumed and privately consumed products, and (c) real-self and ideal-self image relationships.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BirdwellAl E., “A Study of the Influence of Image Congruence on Consumer Choice,” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, 1964.
2.
BourneFrancis S., “Different Kinds of Decisions and Reference-Group Influence,” in BlissPerry, ed., Marketing and the Behavioral Sciences, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1963, 247–55.
3.
DouglasJohn, FieldGeorge A., and TarpeyLawrence X., Human Behavior in Marketing, Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1967, 66.
4.
EvansFrank B., “Psychological and Objective Factors in the Prediction of Brand Choice: Ford Versus Chevrolet,” Journal of Business, 32 (October 1959), 340–69.
5.
GrubbEdward L., “Consumer Perception of ‘Self Concept’ and its Relation to Brand Choice of Selected Product Types,” in BennettP. D., ed., Marketing and Economic Development, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1965, 419–24.
6.
MartineauPierre, Motivation in Advertising, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957, 45.
7.
OsgoodCharles E., SuciGeorge J., and TannenbaumPercy H., The Measurement of Meaning, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957, 20.
8.
RogersCarl R., Client-Centered Therapy, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1965, 501.
9.
SommersMontrose S., “Product Symbolism and the Perception of Social Strata,” in GreyserStephen A., ed, Toward Scientific Marketing, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1964, 200–16.
10.
WilliamT. Tucker and PainterJohn J., “Personality and Product Use,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 45 (October 1961), 325–9.
11.
WinerB. J., Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1962, 155.
12.
WylieRuth C., The Self Concept, Lincoln: The University of Nebraska Press, 1961.
