Companies commit considerable resources to building brand associations that resonate with consumers’ identities and facilitate strong consumer–brand bonds. The current research investigates a potential disadvantage of this popular strategy. The results from three studies show that consumers with a high degree of self‐brand connection respond negatively to brand developments (e.g., brand acquisitions and repositioning) that change brand meaning. The authors show that this effect is due to a change in the identity signaled by the brand. The results contrast with existing research, which has consistently found that brand connections promote probrand behavior and serve as a buffer against negative brand information.

No abstract

Advertisers can choose among different ad claims when framing commercial messages about a new service offer. Two alternative ad claims are functional ad claims, focusing on product or service attributes and benefits, and experiential ad claims, focusing on future experiences with the product or service. This article proposes that different ad claims evoke different memory structures (semantic vs. episodic), and that different memory structures require different types of cognitive processing (system 1 vs. system 2). In two experiments using need for cognition as a dispositional trait of level of cognitive processing, this article shows that a new service entrant with experiential ad claims will be less favorably evaluated when consumers engage in more effortful, or system 2, processing, than when consumers engage in less effortful processing (system 1). For functional claims, however, the evaluation of the new service does not differ between the two types of cognitive processing (system 1 vs. system 2).

No abstract

No abstract