The Impact of Incomplete Typeface Logos on Perceptions of the Firm

Abstract

This research investigates the influence of incomplete typeface logos on consumer perceptions of the firm. In these logos, parts of the characters in the company name are intentionally missing or blanked out, giving rise to a form of perceptual ambiguity. Three studies demonstrate that although incomplete typeface logos have an unfavorable influence on perceived firm trustworthiness, they have a favorable influence on perceived firm innovativeness. The former influence is tied to the logo's perceived clarity, while the latter influence is tied to its perceived interestingness. Furthermore, incomplete typeface logos have an unfavorable influence on overall attitude toward the firm, but only for consumers with a prevention, rather than promotion, focus. These findings suggest that firms should avoid incomplete typeface logos if perceptions of trustworthiness are critical or if consumers are likely to have a prevention focus. However, such logos may be successfully employed with promotion-focused consumers, and they may be used as a tool to position a firm as innovative.

Living brands: consumer responses to animated brand logos

“…For example, an entertainment company is expected to provide fun and colorful entertainment, but an insurance company is expected to provide predictable protection (Hagtvedt 2011). The latter firm thus fits with brand cues signaling stability and predictability, which seem more likely to arise from static or object-animated logos rather than the more malleable behavior implied by agent animation, which fits better with the entertainment firm.…”

“…The brand logo is a cornerstone of brand identity (Lupton 2004), and prior research has focused on understanding the influences of its graphical and typographic elements (Hagtvedt 2011;Henderson et al 2004;Janiszewski and Lans et al 2009). Notably, recent research demonstrates that implied movement in static logos favorably influences brand attitudes by enhancing engagement (Cian et al 2014).…”

Linking corporate logo, corporate image, and reputation: An examination of consumer perceptions in the financial setting

“…Hutton (1987Hutton ( , 1997, O'Leary (1987) Somerick (2000), Spaeth (1995) and Tantillo, Janet, and Richard (1995) believe that a typeface can create a significant impression and an optimistic image with the public: modification of the company's typeface helps to communicate the company's goals (Henderson, Giese, and Cote 2004;Spaeth 1999Spaeth , 1995. Furthermore, a typeface can contribute to increasing a company's value (Hagtvedt, 2011). Therefore, based on the discussion that highlights the importance of typeface, its ambiguous relationship within corporate logo research, and finally, relevance to the present context of the study, it is hypothesized:…”

Evaluating the impact of corporate logos towards corporate reputation

“…Typeface is an important dimension of the corporate logo (Carter, 1982;Hagtvedt, 2011;Melewar and Saunders, 1998;Olins, 1991) and its implementation is thus crucial, which can support other elements of corporate visual identity systems (Henderson et al, 2004;Spaeth, 1999). There is also a fit with the perspective advocated by Henderson et al (2004), that a company's typeface helps to communicate the company's goals and the message should communicate consistency (Bottomley and Doyle, 2006;Klink, 2003 The comments above signified the direct relationship between the corporate name and corporate logo.…”