Is It Really Love? A Comparative Investigation of the Emotional Nature of Brand and Interpersonal Love

Abstract

The use of interpersonal love theories is standard in brand love research. Yet no empirical evidence exists to confirm the equivalence of the emotional nature of these forms of love, which is required to justify the transfer of theories and measures from interpersonal to brand love settings. Building on dimensional emotional theories, this study compared the emotional nature of brand love against interpersonal love, interpersonal liking, and brand liking, using a mixed‐method approach. Qualitative Study 1 revealed emotional differences and similarities between the two love constructs; in particular, unlike interpersonal love, brand love was driven by rational benefits, such as product quality. Study 2 combined physiological and pictographic measures to show that brand love was less arousing than interpersonal love, though loved brands can be as arousing as close friends and induce more positive valence than this interpersonal relationship. According to dimensional emotional theories, interpersonal love and brand love thus differ, and researchers require prudence before transferring interpersonal love theories and scales directly to brand love research, without accounting for differences in the emotional nature of brand love and interpersonal love.

Brand love and positive word of mouth: the moderating effects of experience and price

“…It is considered a driver of consumers' emotional attachment to a brand (see Chauduri and Holbrook, 2001;Langner et al, 2015). Hence, strong trust in a brand leads to positive outcomes such as positive attitudes, stronger commitment and loyalty (Knox et al, 1993), and is a focal factor contributing to brand love (Albert et al, 2008;Drennan et al, 2015).…”

Fashion Brand Love: Application of a Cognition–Affect–Conation Model

“…Thus, developing brand love is considered as a primary goal for customer relationship marketing (CRM) and brand management (Pawle and Cooper 2006). Accordingly, there has been a substantial amount of academic research on brand love and its relationship to consumer behaviors such as shopping/brand experiences (Pandowo 2016;Sarkar et al 2019), purchase intentions (Fetscherin 2014;Pawle and Cooper 2006), brand loyalty (Alnawas and Alrarifi 2015;Drennan et al 2015;Fournier 1998;Huang 2017;Thomson et al 2005;Wallace et al 2014), brand trust (Albert and Merunka 2013;Langner et al 2015), positive word-of-mouth (Karjaluoto et al 2016;Wallace et al 2014), and willingness to pay (Albert and Merunka 2013;Thomson et al 2005). Fournier (1998) argued that consumers are capable of emotionally bonding with certain brands in a similar manner to developing interpersonal relationships and her claim was supported by later research that found consumers can build emotional connections with brands just like developing love in a relationship (Carroll and Ahuvia 2006;Wallace et al 2014).…”

Relational Domain Switching: Interpersonal Insecurity Predicts the Strength and Number of Marketplace Relationships

“…Consumers develop meaningful relationships with brands and service providers (Fournier & Alvarez, ; Price & Arnould, ). These marketplace relationships can buffer fears of existential insecurity (Rindfleisch, Burroughs, & Wong, ), define the self (Park, MacInnis, Priester, Eisingerich, & Iacobucci, ), and ignite powerful emotions such as passion and “true love” (Ji, ; Langner, Schmidt, & Fischer, ). Indeed, there are many documented similarities across relationships involving people, service providers, and brands (Fournier & Alvarez, ; Gwinner, Gremler, & Bitner, ; Loroz & Braig, ), but what has not been adequately examined is whether marketplace relationships can stand‐in for interpersonal relationships.…”