Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Purpose
Using food brands as a case in point, the purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between a local vs global brand positioning strategy and buying impulsivity, as well as the mediating role of construal level. The findings add a psychological argument to the array of reasons for firms to opt for a local instead of a global brand positioning strategy: local food brands promote higher levels of buying impulsivity than global brands by lowering consumers’ level of construal.
Design/methodology/approach
Five experiments use student and nonstudent samples, different construal level indices and generic and brand-specific buying impulsivity measures to test the hypotheses.
Findings
Local food brands promote higher levels of buying impulsivity than global brands by lowering consumers’ level of construal. Because local brands are proximal to consumers’ lifestyles, values, preferences and behaviors, they decrease the psychological distance between the brand and the consumer, compared with global brands. The smaller psychological distance lowers consumers’ construal level and renders the immediate, concrete, appetitive attributes of the product more salient, thus making consumers more prone to impulsively buy a local brand than a global one.
Practical implications
For the choice between a global or local brand positioning strategy, this paper argues in favor of the latter. Local (food) branding is a concrete brand positioning mechanism that can influence and benefit from consumers’ buying impulsivity.
Originality/value
The research reveals heretofore unknown but important implications of local vs global brand positioning strategies for consumers’ construal level and buying impulsivity.
When more likes is not better: the consequences of high and low likes-tofollowers ratios for perceived account credibility and social media marketing effectiveness.
When deciding whether to eat inside a restaurant or how many health protection items to purchase, individuals in the coronavirus disease era tend to consider the infection risk of crowds of generalized others. With a field study and four experiments, the present study identifies associations between COVID-19 and friendship (e.g., thinking of a friend while reading COVID-19-related news, perceiving a friend as the source of infection, noting friends' presence during potential COVID-19 exposure) that decrease both infection risk perceptions and protective behaviors. The sense of safety that stems from psychological closeness of friends reduces perceived virus infection risks associated with third-party crowds. The distinction between psychological closeness and safety toward friends versus acquaintances widens with clear in-group/out-group boundaries, such that this friend-shield effect is especially pronounced among people whose group boundaries are well established. Limiting interactions to close friends and family members is a common protective measure to reduce COVID-19 transmission risk, but the study findings demonstrate that this practice also unintentionally creates other issues, in that people tend to perceive reduced health risks and engage in potentially hazardous health behaviors. By identifying this risk and encouraging more holistic responses, this research offers implications for individuals, health officials, and policymakers.
Public Significance StatementEven in the face of health measures designed to limit interactions to reduce coronavirus disease (COVID-19) transmission, people experience reduced risk perceptions and engage in riskier behaviors when COVID-19 is associated with their friends. Noting this link, this research shows individuals, health practitioners, and policymakers that they need to consider the effects of social distancing measures on psychological risk perceptions and behaviors when designing and implementing complementary health campaigns.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.