Brand and Product Presentation in Voice Shopping: Investigating the Effects of Message-Design Adaptations

Abstract

Voice shopping is on the rise. However, with the absence of visual stimuli, consumers face difficulties in processing brand and product information during the shopping process. Drawing on the load theory of attention and the literature on imagery and information processing, the authors conducted two studies to examine how the level of imagery in auditory product descriptions and the number of product attributes shape consumer responses. The results indicate that high-imagery descriptions increase brand stimulation, which in turn improves brand attitude, purchase intention, and actual product purchase. Additionally, the imagery level of an auditory product description positively influences brand recall directly. These results provide new insights into how auditory message design shapes consumer evaluation and decision-making in voice-based shopping contexts.

Keywords

voice shopping branding auditory message

The market for devices powered by artificial intelligence (AI), such as chatbots and voice assistants (e.g., ChatGPT, Amazon's Alexa), is experiencing rapid growth (Haan 2026). Among these, voice-based applications are particularly noteworthy, because they enable convenient, hands-free access to information and services, with global adoption reaching 8.4 billion devices as of 2024 (Kumar 2026; Statista 2022). One expanding application of voice assistants is shopping: 49.6% of U.S. consumers used voice search for shopping in 2025 (Capital One Shopping 2025), with global voice shopping spending projected to reach $186.26 billion worldwide by 2030 (Grand View Research 2024).

Despite this growth, voice shopping poses unique challenges for both consumers and marketers. Unlike traditional online shopping, voice interactions lack visual cues, making it more difficult for consumers to process product information (Munz and Morwitz 2019; Ryan 2020), because shoppers usually receive product descriptions derived from websites, which are rarely tailored for voice-based shopping (Hörner 2019). One particular challenge is the loss of brand visibility, as the lack of comprehensible product and brand information makes it harder to differentiate between brands and to build brand-related associations (Mari 2019). Marketers therefore face the question of how to design auditory product messages that effectively enhance processing of product and brand information. In such contexts, vivid verbal descriptions that stimulate mental imagery may become particularly important for helping consumers visualize and evaluate products (Bolls and Muehling 2007).

Previous research on auditory communication, however, has primarily examined how something is said (e.g., Lowe and Haws 2017), rather than what is said. Likewise, research on imagery level, the extent to which a message evokes sensory experiences and mental representations, has so far focused on text ads or (auditory) radio ads, which differ significantly from the decision context and design options in voice shopping. Unlike radio, voice shopping involves concrete product choices, where the level of imagery in the message can directly affect brand perception and purchase decisions. Voice shopping also lacks supplementary elements such as music, making verbal design features even more critical.

Our article addresses this gap by examining two research questions: (1) how the imagery level of the product description influences brand stimulation, brand attitude, brand recall, and acceptance of product recommendations in voice shopping, and (2) how the number of product attributes presented, that is, the information load, affects consumers’ evaluations and how it interacts with imagery level.

Our research contributes to the literature on auditory communication by emphasizing what is said rather than how it is said. While prior studies have mainly focused on paralinguistic voice features such as tone, pitch, or voice numerosity (e.g., Lowe and Haws 2017), our work highlights the impact of imagery level and the number of product attributes on consumers’ evaluations and responses in voice-based decision contexts. It further expands on existing work on auditory imagery, which has primarily focused on radio advertising, by applying it to the interactive environment of voice shopping (e.g., Bolls 2006). Our findings offer practical guidance for designing voice-based product descriptions that help consumers process information more effectively, thereby enhancing brand recall, favorable evaluations, and acceptance of product recommendations.

Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

Voice Shopping

Voice shopping refers to the process of searching for, evaluating, and purchasing products or services via voice-based interfaces (Wang and Bae 2025). Therefore, consumers rely primarily on auditory input for conveying information and guiding decisions.

In audio-based interactions, both content (what is said) and delivery (how it is said) can influence consumer judgments. Research on the latter demonstrates that AI-generated voices with differing vocal tract lengths impact advertising performance (Efthymiou et al. 2024), while exposure to multiple, diverse voices can enhance persuasion (Chang, Mukherjee, and Chattopadhyay 2023). Acoustic features like pitch also shape perceptions, such as making products seem larger (Lowe and Haws 2017). The use of auditory images also suggests that listeners can retain various characteristics of the auditory information, which affects their response to the message (Hubbard 2012).

Despite the recently growing research on auditory communication in voice shopping, findings in terms of the content of the message (what is said) remain sparse. Previous work has examined different drivers of purchase decisions, such as mood (Halbauer and Klarmann 2022) and product involvement (Tassiello, Tillotson, and Rome 2021). Other studies have identified decision-making challenges, given that consumers can only process a limited amount of information during an interaction and do not consider all options at once (Dellaert et al. 2020; Penha et al. 2022). Further, the loss of brand visibility is associated with voice shopping, as brand information is harder to perceive and compare, challenging differentiation and the formation of brand associations (Mari 2019). Suggested remedies include personalizing messages (Rhee and Choi 2020) and optimizing the sequence of brand recommendations (Halbauer, Jacob, and Klarmann 2022) (for more details, see Web Appendix A).

As yet, influencing consumers’ product and brand perceptions in voice shopping without having to personalize the message to each consumer has received little scholarly attention (Mari 2019; McLean, Osei-Frimpong, and Barhorst 2021). We address both challenges (i.e., the loss of brand visibility and the limited capacity to process information) by examining the effectiveness of two adaptations in message design: the imagery level and the number of product attributes used.

The Effect of Imagery Level in Voice Shopping Messages

Bolls and Lang (2003) describe imagery processing as a sensory method of encoding, processing, and evoking information, resulting in sensory experience. The mental state associated with a higher imagery level can be achieved through vivid verbal messages (Miller and Marks 1997) and instructions to imagine (Babin and Burns 1997) (e.g., “imagine us as your little place of retreat”).

Previous research has shown that mental imagery can evoke cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses. High imagery (vs. low imagery) can improve memorization of brand attributes (cognitive response) (e.g., Bolls 2006), as storing information visually and/or verbally enhances ease of information recall (Paivio 1969). Unnava, Agarwal, and Haugtvedt (1996) support this idea, noting that information in a high-imagery condition provokes consumers to generate mental images.

The influence of mental imagery on attitudes follows this line of argument. According to Tversky and Kahneman (1973), consumers rely on the most accessible information when forming attitudinal judgments. High-imagery messages increase the mental availability of such information, resulting in stronger brand attitudes, particularly when the content is positive (e.g., Bone and Ellen 1992).

Regarding behavioral responses, mental imagery strengthens purchase intentions (Aydınoğlu and Krishna 2019) and can lead to actual behavioral changes (Andrade et al. 2016; Miller and Stoica 2004). Based on these findings, we expect high-imagery voice-based product descriptions to enhance brand-related cognitive and affective responses, to strengthen behavioral intentions, and ultimately to affect consumer choice. Hence, we hypothesize:

H₁: When comparing products in a high-imagery (vs. low-imagery) condition, consumers will (a) recall the brand better, (b) form more favorable attitudes toward the brand, (c) report higher purchase intentions, and (d) be more likely to choose the recommended product.

While mental imagery may shape behavioral intentions, Bone and Ellen (1992) suggest that this effect is indirect, operating through affective responses. Research has supported this indirect connection, showing that brand stimulation, a specific form of affective response to a brand, can drive purchase intention (Krishna 2012).

Research further suggests that the imagery level influences affective stimulation. Imagining products in a retail context can strongly influence consumer emotions (Compeau, Higgins, and Huff 1999). Similarly, high-imagery processing of positive events increases positive emotions and reduces anxiety, compared with low-imagery conditions (Holmes et al. 2006). Thus, the degree of mental imagery influences the intensity of the emotion (MacInnis and Price 1987). Building on this, we hypothesize that brand stimulation mediates the relationship between imagery level and our outcome variables:

H₂: Brand stimulation mediates the effect of imagery level on brand recall, brand attitude, purchase intention, and acceptance of a product recommendation.

The Moderating Role of Product Description

A voice assistant's product recommendation contains different levels of information load, defined as the amount and variety of product information given (e.g., Wang and Benbasat 2009). Previous research on its effects is mixed: Some authors have found that higher information load facilitates information processing and results in more competent decision-making (Chewning and Harrell 1990), while others have reported cognitive overload, leading to poorer purchase decisions (e.g., Jacoby, Speller, and Berning 1974). In voice shopping, consumers need sufficient product information to evaluate items and make decisions (Penha et al. 2022). This implies descriptions must be detailed enough to meet informational needs.

Since both the imagery level and the number of product attributes are key elements of auditory product descriptions, their interaction is likely to shape consumer responses. The load theory of attention and cognitive control (Lavie et al. 2004) suggests that the processing of central (task-relevant) versus peripheral stimuli (indirectly relevant or irrelevant) depends on perceptual load. Under low perceptual load, spare cognitive resources allow peripheral cues (like imagery) to be processed. Under high perceptual load, when many attributes are presented, peripheral information is more likely to be neglected (Lavie and De Fockert 2005; Macdonald and Lavie 2011). A similar logic applies to information load, the amount of cognitive effort required to process product information. Thus, while high imagery and extensive product information may enhance message effectiveness when presented individually, their combination may diminish the processing of imagery due to attentional constraints. We therefore hypothesize:

H₃: The number of product attributes moderates the indirect effects of imagery level, such that these indirect effects weaken under high information load.

Figure 1 depicts an overview of our conceptual model.

Figure 1.
Conceptual Model for Studies 1–2.

Empirical Studies

Pilot Study

We conducted a pilot study (N = 170) to test that visual (vs. auditory) product descriptions generally lead to better information intake and recall. The results supported our assumption: Both product and brand recall were significantly higher for the visual manipulation. These findings highlight the need to adapt auditory messages in voice shopping (for more details, see Appendix A).

Study 1

Building on these insights, we conducted two Institutional Review Board–approved experimental studies. Raw data, analysis code, and preregistrations are available at https://researchbox.org/4792. Study 1 aimed to measure the influence of the imagery level on brand attitude, brand recall, and purchase intention and the underlying effects of brand stimulation. We further examined whether and how the number of product attributes moderates this effect. To test these hypotheses, we conducted an online study featuring a 2 (imagery level: low vs high) × 2 (number of product attributes: five vs. ten) between-subjects design.

Stimuli

Given that low-priced household goods are among the items most commonly purchased via voice shopping in the United States (Southern 2019), we selected two products—laundry detergent and pralines—in this category after pretesting. We ensured that the participants perceived the fictional brand names, Lodex and Sugarland, to be equal regarding complexity.

We designed and generated auditory messages using the default female voice in Amazon Polly's text-to-speech application (Deloitte 2018). To manipulate information load, messages contained either five or ten named product attributes (e.g., scent, weight). We stayed below the 12-attribute overload threshold (Jacoby, Speller, and Berning 1974) and centered conditions around Miller's (1956) seven blocks. As one popular method involved doubling the information load (Varan et al. 2020), a comparison of five versus ten attributes seemed appropriate to distinguish between low and high information load.

Brand descriptions followed established imagery manipulations (Babin and Burns 1997). High-imagery messages used instructions to imagine (e.g., “Imagine us as your support team”), descriptive language (e.g., “Lodex: Taking care of your dirty deeds”), and concrete words (e.g., “Your little helper for your everyday laundry madness”) (Bolls and Lang 2003). To ensure consistency, we kept product information and audio message lengths equal across conditions. For the low-imagery condition, we included neutral product information to balance the message length. Moreover, we priced our products based on current market prices to prevent biases in product evaluations caused by discounts or other pricing distortions.

For more details on the pretests and manipulations, see Appendices A and B.

Participants and procedure

We recruited participants using an online panel (Prolific), targeting U.S.-based users who shop online at least once a month. To ensure careful listening to voice messages, access was limited to desktop devices. The participants received approximately $2.50 for their participation plus a 25% bonus for attentive listening, verified via platform logs. We excluded three participants for failing at least one of the attention checks, yielding 391 participants and thus 782 observations (M_age = 40 years, SD = 11; 49.4% female, 50.1% male, .5% other gender), as each participant evaluated two product recommendations, one for detergent and one for pralines, within one condition. Of the participants, 64.5% reported owning a voice assistant, and 35% stated they had purchased a product from a voice assistant at least once.

Study 1 had two parts. First, participants were introduced to “Eve,” a smart home assistant for online shopping, and familiarized themselves with it by requesting jokes. Then, they watched a short video explaining the voice shopping process.

In the second part, participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups and were instructed to initiate a voice shopping process for laundry detergent and pralines (presented in random order) using Eve. For each product, they submitted a textual request and then received auditory product recommendations based on the experimental manipulation. All brands were fictitious.

Measures

Following each recommendation, we measured purchase intention, brand attitude, and brand stimulation using seven-point Likert-type scales (1 = “strongly disagree,” and 7 = “strongly agree”). To assess unaided recall, we asked participants to recall the brand name of the recommended product (with 1 = recall, 0 = no recall); we tolerated minor misspellings and closely related variants of the brand name. We adapted the scales from previous studies with high internal consistency (see Table 1 for scale details).

Table 1.
Overview of Scales Used.

Scale Items Cronbach's Alpha Authors

Purchase intention Unlikely–Likely
Study 1: .97

Study 2: .95
Till and Busler (2000)

Definitely would not–Definitely would

Improbable–Probable

Brand attitude I feel the brand's product is good
Study 1: .96

Study 2: .93
Kempf and Laczniak (2001)

I like the brand's product

I feel the brand's product is favorable

Brand stimulation The brand makes a strong impression on my visual sense or other senses
Study 1: .85

Study 2: .85
Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello (2009)

I find this brand interesting in a sensory way

The brand does not appeal to my senses (r)

This brand induces feelings and sentiments

I don’t feel strong emotions toward this brand (r)

This brand is an emotional brand

Notes: (r) = reverse-coded.

For our analyses, we calculated the average of the responses from multi-item scales to create composite scores for all constructs. Table 2 reports the means and standard deviations of the variables according to imagery conditions.

Table 2.
Overview of Means and Standard Deviations.

Purchase Intention Brand Attitude Brand Recall Brand Stimulation

M SD M SD M SD M SD

Low imagery 5.16 1.73 5.20 1.36 .37 .48 4.17 1.31

High imagery 5.33 1.70 5.39 1.30 .49 .50 4.46 1.33

Notes: N = 782 (low imagery: 392; high imagery: 390).

Results

To test our hypotheses, we estimated three mediation models to examine the effect of imagery level on purchase intention, brand attitude, and brand recall via brand stimulation (see Table 3). All models accounted for the nonindependence of observations by clustering standard errors at the participant level. For purchase intention and brand attitude, we used structural equation modeling with 1,000 bootstrap resamples to obtain inference on indirect effects. Because brand recall is binary, we fitted a generalized structural equation model with a logit link.

Table 3.
(Generalized) Structural Equation Model.

Path 1: Effects on Mediator

Brand Stimulation

B SE p 95% CI

Imagery level .36 .16 .03 [.04, .67]

Product attributes .23 .17 .16 [−.09, .56]

Imagery level × Product attributes −.12 .24 .62 [−.58, .35]

Constant 4.05 .11 .00 [3.82, 4.27]

Path 2: Effects on Dependent Variable

Purchase Intention Brand Attitude Brand Recall

B SE p 95% CI B SE p 95% CI B SE p 95% CI

Brand stimulation .86 .04 .00 [.77, .94] .71 .03 .00 [.65, .78] −.02 .06 .74 [−.15, .10]

Imagery level −.19 .15 .19 [−.48, .09] −.05 .12 .65 [−.28, .18] .48 .22 .03 [.05, .92]

Product attributes −.03 .16 .87 [−.33, .28] .06 .12 .60 [−.17, .30] −.47 .24 .06 [−.95, .01]

Imagery level × Product attributes .23 .22 .29 [−.19, .65] .05 .17 .75 [−.28, .38] .02 .33 .96 [−.63, .66]

Constant 1.61 .21 .00 [1.20, 2.02] 2.19 .17 .00 [1.87, 2.52] −.20 .31 .51 [−.81, .40]

Notes: Results from structural equation modeling and generalized structural equation modeling. Independent variable: imagery level (0 = low, 1 = high); mediator: brand stimulation. N = 782 with clustered standard errors at the participant level. Confidence intervals for indirect effects are based on bootstrapping with 1,000 resamples. Brand recall (binary outcome) was modeled using a generalized structural equation model with a logit link. Bold font in the CI column indicates statistical significance.

Consistent with H₁, imagery level had a direct positive effect on recall, suggesting that higher imagery improves memorability (see Table 3). Recalling a brand increases its likelihood of inclusion in the consumer's consideration set, thereby enhancing its potential for future purchases (e.g., Nedungadi 1990).

Neither the level of imagery nor the number of product attributes had a direct effect on purchase intention or brand attitude. However, higher imagery significantly increased brand stimulation, which in turn positively affected purchase intention and brand attitude, supporting imagery level having an indirect effect on purchase intention (ab = .304, 95% CI: [.033, .575]) and brand attitude (ab = .254, 95% CI: [.019, .489]), consistent with H₂.

We also examined whether the interaction between imagery level and the number of attributes influences brand stimulation (H₃). While we hypothesized that this interaction might attenuate the effect, our analysis yielded no significant result (ab = −.008, 95% CI: [−.053, .038]). However, Table 3 shows that the number of product attributes has a marginal negative effect on brand recall (p = .056), suggesting that more attributes may dilute attention to central information (here, the brand name).

For additional robustness checks, see Web Appendix B.

Study 2

In Study 2, we conducted a laboratory experiment simulating a realistic voice shopping scenario, presenting participants with different products available for purchase. The aim of this study was to replicate the findings from Study 1 in a more controlled yet realistic setting, and to test whether these effects persisted when participants directly compared products and made an actual purchase decision rather than merely reporting their intentions. As with Study 1, we investigated the influence of imagery level on brand stimulation and its subsequent effects on attitude and recall; on purchase intention; and, ultimately, on acceptance of the product recommendation. The results provided support for H₁ and H₂, successfully replicating the effects observed in Study 1. Importantly, we extended these findings by demonstrating that the effect of imagery level persists in actual behavioral outcomes.

Stimuli

We employed a mixed design that incorporated a purchase observation task. We randomly assigned participants to one of four between-subjects treatment conditions, each representing a different combination of audibly presented imagery levels (low vs. low, high vs. high, high vs. low, or low vs. high). Within each condition, participants sequentially evaluated two products, presented in a randomized order. This resulted in repeated measures of the dependent variables captured for each presented product.

Replicating Study 1's design, participants interacted with a recommendation agent in a simulated voice shopping scenario. After pretesting, we used chocolate bars as low-priced household goods. We selected real but unfamiliar brands whose names were of equal complexity (see Appendix A). The imagery manipulation followed Study 1, but because we had found no significant interaction with the number of attributes, we held this factor constant at seven attributes (see Appendix B for manipulations).

Participants and procedure

We recruited student participants at a major German university. After exclusion of two participants following failed attention checks, the final sample consisted of 121 participants (M_age = 22 years, SD = 4.0; 65.3% female, 34.7% male). This yielded 242 observations, based on two product evaluations per participant. Of the participants, 15.7% reported owning a voice assistant, and 2.5% had previously used one for voice shopping.

Each participant received €5 compensation at the start of the experiment. To simulate a realistic voice shopping experience, we used a “Wizard of Oz” design (e.g., Tsai et al. 2021). Participants believed they interacted with an autonomous voice assistant named Eve, but all responses were prerecorded and remotely triggered by a hidden human operator. Participants were tested individually in a lab setting, seated at a desk with a monitor and a branded voice-assistant device (a dummy), which played audio via a hidden Bluetooth speaker (Canalys 2019).

The experiment consisted of two parts. First, participants were introduced to Eve and completed a warm-up task (requesting jokes). Participants then engaged in the core shopping task. They initiated the interaction by saying, “Eve, please order a chocolate bar,” triggering the first product description. Participants would then request an alternative, prompting the second product description. To ensure deeper processing, after both product presentations, they were instructed to ask Eve to repeat both descriptions. Following each presentation, we conducted manipulation checks, and participants responded to brand-related questions.

At the end of the session, participants could make an actual purchase. The experimenter re-entered the room and asked whether or not they would like to buy one of the chocolate bars presented for €1.50, using their €5 compensation.

Measures

We measured brand stimulation, attitude, and recall (0 = no recall, 1 = recall), following the same procedure as in Study 1 (see Table 1). All multi-item scales demonstrated good internal consistency (Nunnally and Bernstein 1994).

We measured product recommendation acceptance (0 = recommendation not purchased, 1 = recommendation purchased) by observing participants’ actual purchase decisions. For an overview of the scales used in the manipulation checks (i.e., imagery elaboration and quality), refer to Appendix C. Table 4 provides a summary of the means and standard deviations of the study variables.

Table 4.
Overview of Means and Standard Deviations (Study 2).

Purchase Intention Brand Attitude Brand Recall Brand Stimulation Imagery Elaboration Imagery Quality

M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

Low imagery 3.40 1.60 3.64 1.44 .30 .46 3.17 1.10 3.23 1.21 3.68 1.48

High imagery 4.24 1.61 4.44 1.46 .42 .50 4.35 1.46 4.28 1.52 4.64 1.57

Notes: N = 242 observations (121 participants who evaluated two stimuli).

Results

To test whether the effect of imagery level on brand attitude, purchase intention, brand recall, and product recommendation acceptance was mediated by brand stimulation, we estimated four separate multilevel mediation models (see Table 5). These followed the path-analytic framework for within-participant designs outlined by Montoya and Hayes (2017), consistent with PROCESS Model 4 (Hayes 2018) logic. All models included participant-level random intercepts to account for repeated measurements within participants. We modeled continuous outcomes using linear mixed modeling, and binary outcomes with generalized linear mixed modeling and a logit link. We estimated indirect effects via clustered nonparametric bootstrapping with 1,000 participant-level resamples. We restricted all analyses related to actual product choice and recommendation acceptance to conditions in which we presented both high- and low-imagery descriptions, to ensure sufficient variation in the independent variable. Robustness checks including covariates (see Web Appendix C) confirmed the results.

Table 5.
Mediation Path Estimates for Effects of Imagery Level via Brand Stimulation on Four Dependent Variables (Study 2).

Path 1: Effects on Mediator

Brand Stimulation

B SE p

Imagery level 1.28 .16 <.001

Constant 3.12 .12 <.001

Path 2: Effects on Dependent Variable

Purchase Intention Brand Attitude Brand Recall Recommendation Acceptance

B SE p B SE p B SE p B SE p

Brand stimulation .85 .06 <.001 .77 .052 <.001 −.04 .11 .722 .57 .17 .001

Imagery level −.19 .16 .235 −.14 .15 .333 .67 .33 .045 .81 .46 .079

Constant .71 .21 .001 1.20 .19 <.001 −.82 .43 .057 −3.10 .67 <.001

Notes: Results from linear mixed modeling and generalized linear mixed modeling with random intercepts for participants. Independent variable: imagery level (0 = low, 1 = high); mediator: brand stimulation. N (purchase intention, brand attitude, brand recall) = 242 observations. N (recommendation acceptance) = 121 observations. Confidence intervals for indirect effects are based on 1,000 bootstrapped samples clustered by participant. The p-values for the linear mixed models are based on Satterthwaite approximations.

The manipulation check confirmed the success of the imagery manipulation. Products presented at a high imagery level elicited significantly higher scores for imagery elaboration (F(1, 239) = 36.17, p < .001) and imagery quality (F(1, 239) = 23.89, p < .001). The mediation analyses revealed a full mediation of the effect of imagery level on brand attitude (ab = .99, 95% CI: [.83, 1.16]), purchase intention (ab = 1.09, 95% CI: [.93, 1.26]), and product recommendation acceptance (ab = .92, 95% CI: [.61, 1.33]) via brand stimulation. In contrast, brand stimulation did not significantly mediate the relationship between imagery level and brand recall (ab = −.05, 95% CI: [−.22, .14]). However, the direct effect of imagery level on brand recall was significant (see Table 5).

Together, these findings support our hypothesized mediating role of brand stimulation in the effects of imagery level on brand attitude, purchase intention, and product recommendation acceptance (H₂). For brand recall, as in Study 1, the effect appears to be direct (supporting H₁) with no evidence of mediation.

To further evaluate the influence of imagery level on actual product choice, we conducted a series of pairwise Fisher's exact tests, applying Bonferroni correction to control for multiple comparisons. A significantly greater proportion of participants chose the high-imagery product (59%) compared with the low-imagery product (23%; p < .001) and no product (18%; p < .001). There was no significant difference between choosing the low-imagery product and choosing no product (p = 1.00). Among those who made a purchase decision, a binomial test revealed that 72% chose the high-imagery product over the low-imagery option (p = .001, 95% CI: [.60, 1.00]).

General Discussion

With the increasing popularity of voice assistants in voice shopping, appropriate product presentation is becoming ever more important for retailers. Across two studies, we demonstrate how practitioners will benefit from adapting the imagery level of product descriptions. High-imagery messages enhanced brand stimulation, which in turn improved brand attitude, purchase intention, and product recommendation acceptance. Participants also showed a behavioral preference for products described with high imagery, indicating that mental imagery influences not only perceptions but actual choices. Additionally, imagery level had a direct, positive effect on brand recall. Overall, these findings highlight the role of mental imagery in shaping both attitudinal and behavioral responses, emphasizing the value of vivid, sensory-rich product descriptions in marketing communication.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

Our study contributes to the growing literature on voice commerce in several ways. Our pilot study supports Mari's (2019) proposal that voice shopping may reduce brand visibility. However, our research offers a solution to mitigate this problem by adapting the product description's imagery level. Further, our findings extend research on auditory communication by shifting the focus from how messages are spoken to what is said.

For practitioners, the results offer clear guidance: Retailers like Amazon and developers of voice-based applications (e.g., Alexa Skills) can leverage our findings to enhance voice assistant presentations. The concrete, vivid language can be applied to any product or service presented through auditory channels, leading to enhanced consumer engagement and brand effectiveness. In competitive settings, this can allow voice shopping retailers to create meaningful differentiation and gain a competitive edge in an increasingly saturated channel.

Limitations and Future Research

Our study has several limitations suggesting future research directions. First, our findings are based on two low-involvement, everyday products. This restricts generalizability of our results to high-involvement categories, in which imagery may play an even greater role. Future research should extend this work to a broader set of product types. Secondly, we standardized the length of the voice messages to 30 seconds, which may have influenced the participants’ cognitive processing. Third, we focused on purely auditory assistants. Future work should investigate whether adding visuals enhances or overloads consumers’ processing. Finally, since our data came from online and laboratory settings, field studies could prove valuable for confirming the external validity of our findings.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-jnm-10.1177_10949968251410949 - Supplemental material for Brand and Product Presentation in Voice Shopping: Investigating the Effects of Message-Design Adaptations

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-jnm-10.1177_10949968251410949 for Brand and Product Presentation in Voice Shopping: Investigating the Effects of Message-Design Adaptations by Lea Sollfrank, Sophie Feldner and Ju-Young Kim in Journal of Interactive Marketing

Scale	Items	Cronbach's Alpha	Authors
Purchase intention	Unlikely–Likely	Study 1: .97 Study 2: .95	Till and Busler (2000)
Definitely would not–Definitely would
Improbable–Probable
Brand attitude	I feel the brand's product is good	Study 1: .96 Study 2: .93	Kempf and Laczniak (2001)
I like the brand's product
I feel the brand's product is favorable
Brand stimulation	The brand makes a strong impression on my visual sense or other senses	Study 1: .85 Study 2: .85	Brakus, Schmitt, and Zarantonello (2009)
I find this brand interesting in a sensory way
The brand does not appeal to my senses (r)
This brand induces feelings and sentiments
I don’t feel strong emotions toward this brand (r)
This brand is an emotional brand

	Purchase Intention	Brand Attitude	Brand Recall	Brand Stimulation
Low imagery	5.16	1.73	5.20	1.36	.37	.48	4.17	1.31
High imagery	5.33	1.70	5.39	1.30	.49	.50	4.46	1.33

Path 1: Effects on Mediator
Imagery level	.36	.16	.03	[.04, .67]
Product attributes	.23	.17	.16	[−.09, .56]
Imagery level × Product attributes	−.12	.24	.62	[−.58, .35]
Constant	4.05	.11	.00	[3.82, 4.27]

Path 2: Effects on Dependent Variable
Brand stimulation	.86	.04	.00	[.77, .94]	.71	.03	.00	[.65, .78]	−.02	.06	.74	[−.15, .10]
Imagery level	−.19	.15	.19	[−.48, .09]	−.05	.12	.65	[−.28, .18]	.48	.22	.03	[.05, .92]
Product attributes	−.03	.16	.87	[−.33, .28]	.06	.12	.60	[−.17, .30]	−.47	.24	.06	[−.95, .01]
Imagery level × Product attributes	.23	.22	.29	[−.19, .65]	.05	.17	.75	[−.28, .38]	.02	.33	.96	[−.63, .66]
Constant	1.61	.21	.00	[1.20, 2.02]	2.19	.17	.00	[1.87, 2.52]	−.20	.31	.51	[−.81, .40]

	Purchase Intention	Brand Attitude	Brand Recall	Brand Stimulation	Imagery Elaboration	Imagery Quality
Low imagery	3.40	1.60	3.64	1.44	.30	.46	3.17	1.10	3.23	1.21	3.68	1.48
High imagery	4.24	1.61	4.44	1.46	.42	.50	4.35	1.46	4.28	1.52	4.64	1.57

Path 1: Effects on Mediator
Imagery level	1.28	.16	<.001
Constant	3.12	.12	<.001

Path 2: Effects on Dependent Variable
Brand stimulation	.85	.06	<.001	.77	.052	<.001	−.04	.11	.722	.57	.17	.001
Imagery level	−.19	.16	.235	−.14	.15	.333	.67	.33	.045	.81	.46	.079
Constant	.71	.21	.001	1.20	.19	<.001	−.82	.43	.057	−3.10	.67	<.001

Footnotes

Appendix A: Pilot Study and Pretests.

Pretest	Testing	Design	Measures	Results
Pilot study	Text versus voice Product and brand recall	Presentation of laundry detergent and pralines with two product options each Between-subjects design: Group 1 = text Group 2 = voice	Product recall: “Please recall as much product information from the two product options that you can remember”	Product recall: M_Text = 94.55, M_Voice = 63.42, p = .01
Pilot study	Text versus voice Product and brand recall		Brand recall: “Can you recall the brand of the [product] the voice assistant suggested?”	Brand recall = 1.226, Exp(B) = 3.406, p = .001
Pretest 1 N = 30	Complexity of the brand names	Textual presentation of the brand names	“How complex do you feel the name [brand name] is?”	Lodex: M_Complex = 3.03; Sugar land: M_Complex = 2.23
Pretest 2 N = 21	Utilitarian and hedonic product option	Presentation of two product options: chocolate bars and cereal bars	Hedonic: Not fun/fun Dull/exciting Not delightful/delightful Not thrilling/thrilling Enjoyable/unenjoyable (Voss, Spangenberg, and Grohmann 2003)	M_Cereal = 4.27, M_Chocolate = 5.44, p = .001
Pretest 3 N = 20	Complexity of the brand names	Presentation of several product options for chocolate bars	“How complex do you feel the name [brand name] is?”	Sugar Rebels: M_Complex = 3.85; Little Love: M_Complex = 4.00

Notes: Bold indicates p < .05.

Appendix B: Exemplary Manipulations of Imagery Level and Number of Product Attributes.

Product	Imagery Level: High	Imagery Level: Low
Pralines (Study 1)	“Sugarland pralines, milk chocolate, medium sized pralines, tasting box, chocolate from Brazil, lavishly decorated, fruity fillings, alcoholic fillings, 5.1 ounce. Sugarland—heavenly pralines. Your traditional chocolate makers with a modern twist. Standing for unique enjoyment and a satisfied smile. Sugarland: Imagine us as your little place of retreat—for your little break in your hectic everyday life. It's 15 dollars total. Do you want to buy it?”	“Sugarland pralines, milk chocolate, medium sized pralines, tasting box, Sugarland chocolate from Brazil, lavishly decorated, fruity fillings, alcoholic fillings. Pralines exist out of chocolate with a filling of any kind. This can vary in flavor or texture. They can be eaten as treat throughout the day from everybody. You can also give them away as a gift. 5.1 ounce of Sugarland. It's 15 dollars total. Do you want to buy it?”
Laundry detergent (Study 1)	“Lodex laundry detergent, liquid detergent, natural ingredients, scent primroses, dermatologically tested, applicable for all fabrics, color gentle, cares for fibers, 100 loads. Lodex—taking care of your dirty deeds. Your little helper for your everyday laundry madness and your brand for high quality, modernity, and washing performance. Do you have daily laundry struggle? Imagine us as your support team. Lodex—we got your back. It's 18 dollars total. Do you want to buy it?	“Lodex laundry detergent, liquid detergent, natural ingredients, scent primroses, dermatologically tested, applicable for all fabrics, color gentle, cares for fiber. The laundry detergent is of high quality and modern. You should put it in a washing machine for a good washing performance. During the washing procedure, the laundry detergent will mix with water and clean the stains and odor from your clothes, 100 loads of Lodex. It's 18 dollars total. Do you want to buy it?”
Chocolate bar: Little Love^a (Study 2); analogous for Sugar Rebels	“Little Love, chocolate bar, in exciting flavors, creamy chocolate, with the super fruit raw cacao, made at low temperatures, quality chocolate. Little Love—inspired by the Mayan way of living with nature! Your natural ingredients brand that uses the gifts of the earth in a conscious way. We focus on sustainable and innovative products. Think of us as your little retreat—for your little break in your hectic everyday life. The bar costs 1.5 euros. Do you want to buy it?”	“Little Love, chocolate bar, raw cocoa, low temperature, chocolate, Little Love in different flavors, high quality, sustainable, innovative. With a filling in the middle, a chocolate bar is a confectionery in bar form. This can be supplemented with other baked goods and can contain various solid or liquid ingredients. It can be eaten on the way or in your home. You can also give it as a gift. The bar costs 1.5 euros. Do you want to buy it?”

Translated from German.

Notes: Underlined text refers to product attributes. Both example stimuli shown here include a high number of product attributes.

Appendix C: Manipulation Checks.

Scale	Items	Cronbach's Alpha
Imagery quality	Overall the images that came to mind while I listened to the suggestion were sharp/dull.	.94 (Study 1) .94 (Study 2)
	Overall the images that came to mind while I listened to the suggestion were intense/weak.
	Overall the images that came to mind while I listened to the suggestion were clear/unclear.
	Overall the images that came to mind while I listened to the suggestion were vivid/vague.
	Overall the images that came to mind while I listened to the suggestion were fuzzy/well-defined.
Imagery elaboration	The mental images that came to mind made me feel as if I was actually experiencing the featured brand.	.94 (Study 1) .91 (Study 2)
	The descriptions made me fantasize about having the opportunity to experience the brand.
	I could easily construct a story about myself and the brand based on the mental images that came to my mind.
	It was easy for me to imagine using this brand product.
	While listening to the description, I found myself daydreaming about the brand.
	The images that came to mind acted as a source of information about the brand.
	I could actually see myself using the brand product.

Coeditor

Peeter Verlegh

Data Availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available via ResearchBox (). Replication materials, including data, code, and stimuli, were shared during the review process with the editorial team via the same ResearchBox.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent Statements

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Goethe University Frankfurt on January 27, 2022. All participants provided written informed consent prior to participating.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Lea Sollfrank

Sophie Feldner

Ju-Young Kim

References

Andrade

Jackie

Khalil

Marina

Dickson

Jennifer

May

Jon

Kavanagh

David J.

(2016), “Functional Imagery Training to Reduce Snacking: Testing a Novel Motivational Intervention Based on Elaborated Intrusion Theory,” Appetite, 100, 256–62.

Aydınoğlu

Nilüfer Z.

Krishna

Aradhna

(2019), “The Power of Consumption-Imagery in Communicating Retail-Store Deals,” Journal of Retailing, 95 (4), 116–27.

Babin

Laurie A.

Burns

Alvin C.

(1997), “Effects of Print Ad Pictures and Copy Containing Instructions to Imagine on Mental Imagery That Mediates Attitudes,” Journal of Advertising, 26 (3), 33–44.

Bolls

Paul D.

(2006), “It’s Just Your Imagination: The Effect of Imagery on Recognition of Product- Versus Non-Product-Related Information in Radio Advertisements,” Journal of Radio Studies, 13 (2), 201–13.

Bolls

Paul D.

Lang

Annie

(2003), “I Saw It on the Radio: The Allocation of Attention to High-Imagery Radio Advertisements,” Media Psychology, 5 (1), 33–55.

Bolls

Paul D.

Muehling

Darrel D.

(2007), “The Effects of Dual-Task Processing on Consumers’ Responses to High- and Low-Imagery Radio Advertisements,” Journal of Advertising, 36 (4), 35–47.

Bone

Paula Fitzgerald

Ellen

Pam Scholder

(1992), “The Generation and Consequences of Communication-Evoked Imagery,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (1), 93–104.

Brakus

Joško J.

Schmitt

Bernd H.

Zarantonello

Lia

(2009), “Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty?” Journal of Marketing, 73 (3), 52–68.

Canalys (2019), “Rise of Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri to Drive US Smart Assistant-Compatible Device Base to 1.6 billion in 2022,” press release (accessed October 25, 2022), https://canalys-prod-public.s3.eu-west1.amazonaws.com/static/press_release/2019/PR070119-rise-of-alexa-google-assistant.pdf.

10.

Capital One Shopping (2025), “Voice Shopping Statistics,” (accessed April 7, 2026), https://capitaloneshopping.com/research/voice-shopping-statistics/.

11.

Chang

Hannah

Mukherjee

Anirban

Chattopadhyay

Amitava

(2023), “More Voices Persuade: The Attentional Benefits of Voice Numerosity,” Journal of Marketing Research, 60 (4), 687–706.

12.

Chewning

Eugene G.

Harrell

Adrian M.

(1990), “The Effect of Information Load on Decision Makers’ Cue Utilization Levels and Decision Quality in a Financial Distress Decision Task,” Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15 (6), 527–42.

13.

Compeau

Deborah

Higgins

Cristopher A.

Huff

Sid.

(1999), “Social Cognitive Theory and Individual Reactions to Computing Technology: A Longitudinal Study,” MIS Quarterly, 23 (2), 145–58.

14.

Dellaert

Benedict G.C.

Shu

Suzanne B.

Arentze

Theo A.

Baker

Tom

Diehl

Kristin

Donkers

Bas

Fast

Nathanael J.

Häubl

Gerald

Johnson

Heidi

, et al. (2020), “Consumer Decisions with Artificially Intelligent Voice Assistants,” Marketing Letters, 31 (4), 335–47.

15.

Deloitte (2018), “Beyond Touch – Voice Commerce 2030: Wie Voice-Assisted Interfaces den Handel in Europa Revolutionieren Werden,” (accessed October 25, 2022), https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/_qs/documents/8031/Beyond_Touch__Voice_Commerce_2030.pdf.

16.

Efthymiou

Fotis

Hildebrand

Christian

de Bellis

Emanuel

Hampton

William

(2024), “The Power of AI-Generated Voices: How Digital Vocal Tract Length Shapes Product Congruency and Ad Performance,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 59 (2), 117–34.

17.

Grand View Research (2024), “Voice Commerce Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report by Device Type (Smart Speakers, Smartphones), by Industry Vertical (Consumer Goods & Retail, Healthcare, Automotive), by Region, and Segment Forecasts, 2024–2030” (accessed November 9, 2025), https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/voice-commerce-market-report.

18.

Haan

Katherine

(2026), “22 Top AI Statistics and Trends,” Forbes (accessed April 7, 2026), https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/ai-statistics/.

19.

Halbauer

Ingo

Jacob

Saskia

Klarmann

Martin

(2022), “Brand Presentation Order in Voice Shopping: Understanding the Effects of Sequential Product Presentation,” Journal of Retailing, 98 (4), 759–78.

20.

Halbauer

Ingo

Klarmann

Martin

(2022), “How Voice Retailers Can Predict Customer Mood and How They Can Use That Information,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39 (1), 77–95.

21.

Hayes

Andrew F.

(2018), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd ed. Guilford Press.

22.

Holmes

Emily A.

Mathews

Andrew

Dalgleish

Tim

Mackintosh

Bundy

(2006), “Positive Interpretation Training: Effects of Mental Imagery Versus Verbal Training on Positive Mood,” Behavior Therapy, 37 (3), 237–47.

23.

Hörner

Thomas

(2019), Marketing mit Sprachassistenten: So Setzen Sie Alexa, Google Assistant & Co Strategisch Erfolgreich ein. Springer Gabler.

24.

Hubbard

Timothy L.

(2012), “Auditory Aspects of Auditory Imagery,” in Multisensory Imagery, Lacey

Simon

Lawson

Rebecca

, eds. Springer, 51–76.

25.

Jacoby

Jacob

Speller

Donald E.

Berning

Carol K.

(1974), “Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load: Replication and Extension,” Journal of Consumer Research, 1 (1), 33–42.

26.

Kempf

Deanne S.

Laczniak

Russell N.

(2001), “Advertising’s Influence on Subsequent Product Trial Processing,” Journal of Advertising, 30 (3), 27–38.

27.

Krishna

Aradhna

(2012), “An Integrative Review of Sensory Marketing: Engaging the Senses to Affect Perception, Judgment and Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (3), 332–51.

28.

Kumar

Naveen

(2026), “53 Latest Voice Search Statistics 2026: Trends & Data,” Demandsage (accessed April 7, 2026), https://www.demandsage.com/voice-search-statistics/.

29.

Lavie

Nilli

De Fockert

Jan

(2005), “The Role of Working Memory in Attentional Capture,” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12 (4), 669–74.

30.

Lavie

Nilli

Hirst

Aleksandra

De Fockert

Jan

Viding

Essi

(2004), “Load Theory of Selective Attention and Cognitive Control,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, 133 (3), 339–54.

31.

Lowe

Michael L.

Haws

Kelly L.

(2017), “Sounds Big: The Effects of Acoustic Pitch on Product Perceptions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 54 (2), 331–46.

32.

Macdonald

James S.P.

Lavie

Nilli

(2011), “Visual Perceptual Load Induces Inattentional Deafness,” Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73 (6), 1780–89.

33.

MacInnis

Deborah J.

Price

Linda

(1987), “The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (4), 473–91.

34.

Mari

Alex

(2019), “Voice Commerce: Understanding Shopping-Related Voice Assistants and Their Effect on Brands,” IMMAA Annual Conference, Northwestern University in Qatar, Doha, Qatar (October 4–6), https://www.zora.uzh.ch/server/api/core/bitstreams/20ab2a5b-aee3-40d8-84f8-c19b71206e6e/content.

35.

McLean

Graeme

Osei-Frimpong

Kofi

Barhorst

Jennifer

(2021), “Alexa, Do Voice Assistants Influence Consumer Brand Engagement? – Examining the Role of AI Powered Voice Assistants in Influencing Consumer Brand Engagement,” Journal of Business Research, 124, 312–28.

36.

Miller

Darryl W.

Marks

Lawrence J.

(1997), “The Effects of Imagery-Evoking Radio Advertising Strategies on Affective Responses,” Psychology and Marketing, 14 (4), 337–60.

37.

Miller

Darryl W.

Stoica

Michael

(2004), “Comparing the Effects of a Photograph Versus Artistic Renditions of a Beach Scene in a Direct-Response Print Ad for a Caribbean Resort Island: A Mental Imagery Perspective,” Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10 (1), 11–21.

38.

Miller

George A.

(1956), “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information,” Psychological Review, 63 (2), 81–97.

39.

Montoya

Amanda K.

Hayes

Andrew F.

(2017), “Two-Condition Within-Participant Statistical Mediation Analysis: A Path-Analytic Framework,” Psychological Methods, 22 (1), 6–27.

40.

Munz

Kurt P.

Morwitz

Vicki

(2019), “Not-So Easy Listening: Roots and Repercussions of Auditory Choice Difficulty in Voice Commerce,” working paper, NYU Stern School of Business.

41.

Nedungadi

Prakash

(1990), “Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice Without Altering Brand Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (3), 263–76.

42.

Nunnally

Jum C.

Bernstein

Ira H.

(1994), “The Assessment of Reliability,” in Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, 248–92.

43.

Paivio

Allan

(1969), “Mental Imagery and Associative Learning and Memory,” Psychological Review, 76 (3), 241–63.

44.

Penha

Gustavo

Krikon

Eyal

Murdock

Vanessa

Avula

Sandeep

(2022), “Helping Voice Shoppers Make Purchase Decisions,” in CHI EA ’22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3519828.

45.

Rhee

Chong E.

Choi

Junho

(2020), “Effects of Personalization and Social Role in Voice Shopping: An Experimental Study on Product Recommendation by a Conversational Voice Agent,” Computers in Human Behavior, 109, 106359.

46.

Ryan

Tom

(2020), “Why Isn’t Voice Commerce Taking Off?” RetailWire (February 10), https://retailwire.com/discussion/why-isnt-voice-commerce-taking-off/.

47.

Southern

Matt G.

(2019), “New Study Reveals What People Are Buying Through Voice Assistants,” Search Engine Journal (January 17), https://www.searchenginejournal.com/new-study-reveals-what-people-are-buying-through-voice-assistants/287277/#close.

48.

Statista (2022), “Number of Digital Voice Assistants in Use Worldwide from 2019 to 2024,” (accessed June 1, 2023), https://www.statista.com/statistics/973815/worldwide-digital-voice-assistant-in-use/.

49.

Tassiello

Vito

Tillotson

Jack

Rome

Alexandra

(2021), “‘Alexa, Order Me a Pizza!’: The Mediating Role of Psychological Power in the Consumer–Voice Assistant Interaction,” Psychology & Marketing, 38 (7), 1069–80.

50.

Till

Brian D.

Busler

Michael

(2000), “The Match-Up Hypothesis: Physical Attractiveness, Expertise, and the Role of Fit on Brand Attitude, Purchase Intent and Brand Beliefs,” Journal of Advertising, 29 (3), 1–13.

51.

Tsai

Wan-Hsiu Sunny

Lun

Carcioppolo

Nicholas

Chuan

Ching-Hua

(2021), “Human Versus Chatbot: Understanding the Role of Emotion in Health Marketing Communication for Vaccines,” Psychology & Marketing, 38 (12), 2377–92.

52.

Tversky

Amos

Kahneman

Daniel

(1973), “Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability,” Cognitive Psychology, 5 (2), 207–32.

53.

Unnava

H. Rao

Agarwal

Sanjeev

Haugtvedt

Curtis P.

(1996), “Interactive Effects of Presentation Modality and Message-Generated Imagery on Recall of Advertising Information,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (1), 81–88.

54.

Varan

Duane

Nenycz-Thiel

Magda

Kennedy

Rachel

Bellman

Steven

(2020), “The Effects of Commercial Length on Advertising Impact,” Journal of Advertising Research, 60 (1), 54–70.

55.

Voss

Kevin E.

Spangenberg

Eric R.

Grohmann

Bianca

(2003), “Measuring the Hedonic and Utilitarian Dimensions of Consumer Attitude,” Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (3), 310–20.

56.

Wang

Bae

Sung Min

(2025), “Encourage Online Consumers to Embrace Voice Shopping: Roles of Tasks, Technology, and Individual Characteristics,” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 20 (4), 293.

57.

Wang

Weiquan

Benbasat

Izak

(2009), “Interactive Decision Aids for Consumer Decision Making in E-Commerce: The Influence of Perceived Strategy Restrictiveness,” MIS Quarterly, 33 (2), 293–320.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.28 MB

Path 1: Effects on Mediator
	Brand Stimulation
	B	SE	p	95% CI
Imagery level	.36	.16	.03	[.04, .67]
Product attributes	.23	.17	.16	[−.09, .56]
Imagery level × Product attributes	−.12	.24	.62	[−.58, .35]
Constant	4.05	.11	.00	[3.82, 4.27]