The aim of this exploratory research is to compare a well-known scale, the Aaker brand personality scale, with an empirical scale based on individuals' relevant attributes, in order to analyse why they can lead to similar brand positioning maps. We provide empirical evidence of how a bias can overwrite the ability of a measurement scale to actually measure its underlying construct. In order to do so, we first find that the two sets of attributes – one derived from the brand personality scale, the other reflecting attributes obtained through a focus group – span common cognitive representations when translated into perceptual maps. We then prove that this outcome is caused by a bias stemming from a more holistic view of the brand, which forces the two cognitive structures towards a common perceptual representation. We conclude discussing the challenges for current theory implicit in our findings, and the implications for managerial practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AakerJ.L. (1997) Dimensions of brand personality.Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 3, pp. 347–356.
2.
BagozziR.P. (1998) Marketing Management.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
3.
BagozziR.P., & DholakiaU.M. (2006) Antecedents and purchase consequences of customer participation in small group brand communities.International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23, 1, pp. 45–61.
4.
BhatS., & ReddyS.K. (1998) Symbolic and functional positioning of brands.Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15, 1, pp. 32–43.
5.
CapraraG.V., BarbaranelliC., & GuidoG. (2001) Brand personality: how to make the metaphor fit?Journal of Economic Psychology, 22, 3, pp. 377–395.
6.
CarrollJ.D., & GreenP.E. (1997) Psychometric methods in marketing research: Part II, multidimensional scaling.Journal of Marketing Research;34, 2, pp. 193–204.
7.
CookeT., SteinkeF., WallravenC., & BulthoffH.H. (2005) A similarity-based approach to perceptual feature validation.ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 95, pp. 59–66.
8.
De PelsmackerP., GuensM., & Van den BerghJ. (2007) Marketing Communications (3rd edn). London: Pearson Education.
9.
DeSarboW.S., & WuJ. (2001) The joint spatial representation of multiple variable batteries collected in marketing research.Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 2, pp. 244–253.
10.
Dillon1R., MaddenT.J., KirmaniA., & MukherjeeS. (2001) Understanding what's in a brand rating: a model for assessing brand and attribute effects and their relationship to brand equity.Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 4, pp. 415–429.
11.
GeuensM., WeijtersB., & De WulfK. (2009) A new measure of brand personality.International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26, 2, pp. 97–107.
12.
GowerJ.C. (1975) Generalized Procrustes analysis.Psychometrika, 40, 1, pp. 33–51.
Pares-NetoP.R., & JacksonD.A. (2001) How well do multivariate data sets match? The advantages of a Procrustean superimposition approach over the Mantel test.Oecologia, 129, 2, pp. 169–178.
21.
PodsakoffP.M., MacKenzieS.B., LeeJ.-Y., & PodsakoffN.P. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 5, pp. 879–903.
22.
ShockerA.D., & SrinivasanV. (1979) Multiattribute approaches for product concept evaluation and generation. A critical review.Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 2, pp. 159–180.
23.
SirgyJ.M. (1982) Self-concept in consumer behaviour: a critical review.Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 3, pp. 287–300.
24.
SteenkampJ.-B.E.M., Van TrijpH.C.M., & Ten BergeJ.M.F. (1994) Perceptual mapping based on idiosyncratic sets of attributes.Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 1, pp. 15–27.
25.
TropeY., LibermanN., & WakslakC. (2007) Construal levels and psychological distance: effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behaviour.Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17, 2, pp. 83–95.
26.
VenablesW.N., & RipleyB.D. (1999) Modern Applied Statistics with S-Plus (3rd edn). New York: Springer.
27.
VisentinM., ColucciM., & MarzocchiG.L. (2011) Genuine representation of brands: a new method of representing unbiased brand-by-attribute perceptions.Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62, 6, pp. 1120–1127.
28.
YinR.K. (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods.London: Sage Publications, Inc.
