repertory grid for brands

8/3/2019 Repertory Grid for Brands

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/repertory-grid-for-brands 1/10

Using Network Analysis to Understand Bran dsGeraldine R. Henderson, Howard University

Dawn Iacobucci, University of Arizona

Bobby J. Calder, Northwestern University

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we model brand associations as associative

networks. Although the idea of brand associative networks is weU

accepted, rarely are these networks elicited and modeled explicitly.

Here, we do so in the context of a branding experiment by using a

combination of qualitative (repertory grid) and quantitative (net-

work analysis) techniques. This elicitation and analysis technique

was used prior to and after subjects saw an advertiseme nt for one of

three types of brand extensions for a popular core brand. Results

confirmed the usefulness of network ana lysis for identifying brand

association stm cture and assessing changes in brand associations as

a result of brand extension activity.

Recently, a new approach to understanding brand equity has

been introduced to the literature (Henderson, Iacobucci, and C alder

1998). In their paper, the authors present a conceptual frameworkto uncover ten brand ing effects based on brand associa tions (Keller

1993). In this paper, we put the Henderson, et al. (1998) framework

to an empirical test. We then m ap these 10 branding effects into

three branding constmc ts: positioning, complementarity, and sub-

stitutabiUty.

Below, we present a brief review of the consumer associative

network approach. We then pursue these conjectures with an

empirical test: Consumers were exposed to information about a

purported forthcoming brand extension. Consumers made judg-

ments of associative Unks and their perceptions are represented as

associative networks. Post-manipulation perceptions are compared

to those held prior to the intervention, and we examine the resultant

stmctures for brand constmcts.

CONSUMER ASSOCIATIVE NETWORKS

RepresentationIt is commonly held that consumers store information in

memory in the form of associative networks (Anderson and Bower

1973; Ellis and Hunt 1992). In general, researchers contend that

knowledge is represented as links of associations among concept

nodes (cf. Sirsi, Ward, and R eingen 1 996). The nodes are units of

information such as brands, attributes, advertisements, etc., and the

links contain the relational tie between the concepts (e.g., a brand

"possesses" much of an attribute, a brand image is "like" the

spokesperson). The links make various associations by connecting

nodes together to form a network of ideas, or a knowledge stm c-

ture. '

1 Associations in network representations of mental models can also

possess strengths, e.g., for an association based on many experi-

ences or exposures to communications. In a graph, strength is

indicated by the thickn ess of the Une, the number of links between

two nodes, or by a numerical indicator near the link.Asymmetrical

relations may also be represented if one node evokes another but

the reverse is not true. W e are presenting symm etric, binary ties for

the purpose of simplicity, though we note that aU that we present

is easily extended to ties w ith strength and direction using standard

network methods (e.g., Knoke and Kuklinski 1982).

Researchers in marketing have recently discussed brand asso-

ciations, primarily as they relate to issues of brand equity, brandimage, and brand know ledge (e.g., Keller 1993; Sirsi, et al. 1996).

Many cognitive theories of consumer behavior posit associative

network stmctures (e.g., Bettman 1971; Calder and Gmder 1989),

and yet rarely are they elicited or modeled empirically. It is

desirable to represent brand associations as networks in order to

allow these stmctural data to be modeled in a matuier most consis-

tent with existing theoretical views of consumer mem ory structure.

Elicitation

Consumer brand associations can be elicited by a variety of

data coUection methods including free association and response

(Green, Wind, and Jain 1973; Krishnan 1996), laddering (Reynolds

and Gutman 1988), and pairwise similarity judgm ents (Hauser andKoppelman 1979).^

In this research, we use a more qualitative method caUed the

repertory grid (Henderson, et al., 199 8; Kelly 19 55; Zaltman and

Coulter 1995). With the repertory grid technique, respondents

choose their own stimulus brands and the attributes that they

personaUy beUeve to be relevant for the comparisons.' We use the

repertory grid primarily because of its ability to bridge the gap

betwee n qualitative data coUection media and quantitative analy sis

techniques (Green, et al., 1973). Although the repertory grid tech-

nique has been mentioned previously in the marketing literature

(Sampson 1 972; Olson and Muderrisoglu 197 7), it has not received

much atten tion in terms of a primary m eans of data coUection until

recently (Henderson, et al. 1998; Zaltman and C oulter 1995).

BRAND CONSTRUCTS

Keller (1993) suggests that brand associations are the "build-

ing blocks" of a brand's equity. However, we posit more abstract

entities, or brand constructs, that comprise a b rand 's equity: posi-

tioning, complementarity, and substitutability. These brand con-

stmcts are comprised of branding effects (brand dUution, branded

features, co-branding , brand parity, brand confusion, and cannibal-

ization) that are in tum com prised of brand associations. The first

brand constmct, positioning, focuses on a particular brand (relative

to others) whereas the latter two, complementarity and substitut-

ability, focus on relationships between brands. We describe each

constmct and the m ethods by which each could be studied. Figure

2Due to the relative newness of associative netw orks to marketing,

we were tempted to make this paper be more tutorial in nature.

Although we did our best to make it read well for those not as

familiar with network approaches, we resisted making it a tutorial

on network methods in marketing in general, or consumer associa-

tive networks in particular, due to the existence of fairly compre-

hensive reviews on these methods. Interested readers are directed

to Iacobucci and Hopkins (1992) for the former and Henderson,

Iacobucci, and Calder (1998) or Krishnan (19 96) for m ore depth

on these methods.

3 A more detailed outline of the repertory grid technique and con-

sumer associative networks is presented in Henderson, Calder, and

Iacobucci (1998).397 Advances in ConsumerResearch

Volume 29 , © 2002



398 / Using Network Analyst to Understand Brands

FIGURE 1

Branding C onstructs, Branding Effects, and Associative Network Methods

Theoretical

Brand

Constructs...

Modeled

using

Associative

Network

Methods...

To Diagnose

Branding

Effects:

POSITIONING Centrality

BrandDilution

BrandedFeatures J

COMPLEMENTS Cohesion Co-Branding

SUBSTITUTES Equivalence

BrandParity

BrandConfusion

Cannibalization

1 presents the relationships between branding constructs, observ-

able branding effects, and associative networks.

g: Brand IMlHtitm/BniBded Features

A brand is positioned as having more good attributes and fewer

poor attributes relative to the other com petitive market offerings. If

a brand has a particularly strong and favorable heritage, the man-

ager may consider leveraging those positive associations by intro-

ducing a brand extension. The positive associations consum ers hold

for the parent brand a re thought to transfer to the new introduction

by the activation of the original brand name. T wo brand positioning

phenomena enjoying current popularity are "brand dilution" and

the "branding of features."

Brand dilution is the extent to which capitalizing on brand

associations (e.g., by introducing brand extensions) may harm the

original brand (Loken and John 1993). Brand dilution would be

demon strated most pointedly by a decrease in positive associations,

or an increase in negative associations with the focal brand. How-

ever, the category itself may be diluted (e.g., as when the c entralities

for positive attribute nodes decreas e, or those for negative attributes

increase). Branded features are attributes closely associated with

the host brand and are candidates to be further branded and

differentiated themselves. Candidates for branded features would

be those attributes high on centrality—those that are important to

the brand and category. With network methods, we could detect

changes in cognitive associations regarding the parent brand. In

particular, centrality indices may be used to verify that the links to

the focal brand are still positive and active.

Complem^i tery Brands: Co-Branding

Complementarity capitalizes on the associations between

brands, seeking, for example, opportunities for co-branding. Co-

branding effects include the use of ingredient brands or com posite

brand s. Ingredient brands can be used as a portion of some product

(e.g., an Intel Pentium Chip inside an IBM ThinkPad Notebook

Com puter, Starbucks coffee served aboard United Airlines flights),

whereas composite brands are the "bundling of two brands to

provide an enhanced consumer benefit or reduced cost" (e.g.,

Microsoft's and General Electric's MSNBC Cable/tntemet offer-

ing). Cohesion associative network method s offer empirical possi-

bilities for co-brand ing. Groups of attributes and brands defined on



Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 29) 139 9

TABLE 1

Degree Centralities Pre- and Post- for all Three Brand-Extensions**

Economy

Pre- Post-

Family

Pre- Post-

Regular

Pre- Post-

Alfa

Benz

Chrysler

Ferrari

Jaguar

Jeep

Lamborghini

Lexus

Mazda

Porsche

Corvette

Porsche Model X

B R m S H - N O N B R I T

CLASSY-LESCLASS

COMMON-UNIOUEEURO-JAPAN

FASTER-SLOWER

FOREIGN-US

GERMAN-JAPAN

HIPRICE-LOPRICE

HIQUAL-LOQUAL

HISTATUS-LOSTATUS

JAPAN-NOTJAPAN

VARIETY-LESS

MATAPPL-YNGAPPL

SPORTY-VARIETY

TERRAIN-TWOWD

SEDAN-SPORTY

*The increases (+) and decreases (-) marked are those that exceeded 1.98 times the average standard deviation of the pre- and post-

conditions within each brand extension condition. A * indicates those that exceede d 1.98 times the average standard dev iation of the pre-

and post- conditions within each brand extension condition. For "economy " and "regular," the difference had to exceed 7 to be significant.

For "family," a difference of 5 was significant (s^ ^^y= 3.64, s,^,y=2.49, s^^^= 3.31).

***Attributes were rated on a continuum (e.g., German-Japanese) with Japanese receiving higher values than G erman. Thus, attribute

nodes should be read as possessing more of the value on the right (Japanese) than the value on the left (German). In other words, the node

German-Japanese could also be read as "More Japanese than G erman."

5

6

0

4

7

6

1

0

6

8

2

0

0

0

25

5

6

0

8

0

6

0

7

5

0

0

0

6

3

6+

5

4

7

1

0

3

7

4

7+

0

0

58

2

7

0

3-

0

0-

4+

6

0-

5+

6+

4+

2

10

0

3

5

7

5

10

8

8

0

0

0

8

105

5

5

6

10

0

5

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

11

0

3

2-

8

4

4-*

7

12+

0

9+

6+*

0-*

124

4

6

4

9

6+*

3

0

6+

0

0

0

2

6

14

0

5

11

6

4

0

7

10

7

0

0

1

178

9

6

0

9

0

6

0

7

6

0

0

0

7

8-

6+

7

4.*

10+

2

0

8

7

1-

9+

0

1

11-9

2-*

10+

0

8

3

0-

5+

5

0-

5+

6+

6+

their mutually connected associations would be fitting candidates

for opportunities to incorporate multiple brands. These groups

reflect stm ctures of a natural complem entarity of the products that

already exists in the consumer mind.

Substitutable Brands: Brand Parity, Brand Confusion, and

Cannibalization

Whereas complements are brands managers seek to package

together, substitutes are brands that compete with one another

(Aaker and Keller 1990). Substitutability includes brand parity,

brand confusion, and cannibalization. Brand parity is the percep-

tion of sameness among brands. Brand parity taken to extreme

yields brand confusion: brands are indistinguishable or commod-

ity-like, and the stimulation of one brand m ay evoke thoughts of

another (Kapferer 1995). Cannibalization occurs when one of a

firm's brands steals share away from another.

METHOD

Below, we describe an experiment in which we explore theeffect of the three Porsche brand extensions and the resultant bran d

associations in a pre-/post- design. Participants were graduate

students in marketing. A 3 (Brand Extension Type) x 2 (pre-/post-

extension response) mixed design was used. The Brand Extension

Type condition represented a between-subjects manipulation

whereas the pre-/post- condition was manipulated on a repeated

measures basis. Participants saw an advertisement for one of three

types of brand extensions: regular, family, or economy. They

comple ted the data task before and after being exposed to the brand

extension intervention.

We advertised Porsche as introducing one of three types of

brand extensions: For 17 participants, "Model X" was as an

economy car, featuring low price and good m ileage. For 15 partici-

pants, "Model X" was a family car with features relating to the



40 0 / Using Network Analysis to Understand Brands

safety and comfort of a family of five (e.g., enlarged tmnk space,

built-in child seats, airbags, four-wheel drive, luggage racks).

Finally, 13 participa nts served as a control group and were told the

"Model X " was "everything you ever thought a Porsche to be " with

no new attributes featured.'' We chose two different extensions

(economy and family) to be consistent with extant literature on

brand extensions (e.g., Loken and John 1993). In the latter, for

instance, the authors introduce brand extensions that are 'cl ose,''med ium,' and 'far' from their parent brand. Thus, in our exercise,

the regular condition would be 'close,' the famDy condition would

be 'medium' and the 'economy' condition would be 'far.'

The 45 participants nam ed (up to) seven sports car brands and

compared them via triadic elicitation.'-' Respondents were asked:

"When you think about sports cars that you would like to own,

which ones come to mind? Please list seven [below] and assume

that money is not a major constra int." They were then provided with

seven blank lines to write in their brand names. As for the second

factor, participants com pleted their data collection task prior to an d

following the brand extension intervention. A multimedia cam-

paign was used: The new Porsche was announced through word-of-

mouth (a conversation excerpt), concept board (a print ad), expert

reviews (C onsume r Repo rts), and a news report (mock article fromthe Wall Street Joumal).

RESULTSEach respo ndent generated a list of cars and proceeded through

the triadic compa risons. A repertory grid matrix was generated for

each participant. Each of the participant's matrices consisted of

between 1 and 8 attributes and between three to seven cars. A

content ana lysis determined a comm on set of 29 attributes across all

respondents. Similariy, a list of 28 vehicles was elicited. For the

purpose of illustration, these lists were parsed down further to 12

cars and 16 attributes based on the agreemen t of at least 4 of the 45

respondents (10 percent of the sample).' We would normally

present visual depictions of these associative networks, however,

for the sake of space, we have included only the associa tive network

summary indices: centrality, cliques, and stmctural equivalents.

Centralities

Table 1 has the degree centralities before and after the inter-

ventions for each of the three brand extensions. Few significant

changes resulted from the advertising communications interven-

tion. The increases (+) and decreases (-) are those over 1.98 times

the average standard deviation of the pre- and post- conditions for

^Ironically, shortly after we had begun our research, Porsche

announced plans to develop and market a sports utility vehicle in

a co-venture arrangement with Mercedes. This announcementadded a dimension of tmth to our cover story; we debriefed

participants by providing them with the Wall Street Journal

article. However, we informed them that the brand names used

within the context of the experiment, including Porsche, were used

just for the sake of example and not because of any relationship

with the actual parent companies.

^Norma lly, a sample size of 45 would not be worthy of consideration

for experimental purposes. However, since this research actually

represents the quantification of otherwise qualitative data, a sample

of 45 is quite healthy.

6For a detailed description of triadic elicitation see Henderson, et al.

(1998).

^Resea rchers desiring fewer (or more) exploratory and idiosyncratic

results would m ove this criterion up (or down). We chose to err foridiosyncrasy and richness of results.

each brand extension condition. A * indicates those that exceeded

1.98 times the averse standard deviation of the pre- and post-

conditions within each brand extension condition. For "econom y"

and "reg ular," the difference had to exceed 7 to be significant. For

"family," a difference of 5 was significant

There were no significant changes in the economy condition.

In the family c ondition, there were significant cha nges to Lexus (-6) , "non-British" (+6), "less-classy" (-8), and "low-quality" (+6).

In the regular condition, there were significant c hanges to Jaguar (-

7) and Slower (-7).

Cliques

Cliques are the primary m easures of cohesion between nodes

in a network and are subgroups based on complete mutuality

(Knoke and Kuklinski 1982). Table 2 ha s the results on the cliques

that formed in the consumer association networks before and after

the manipulations.

There were 2 8 cliques in the pre-economy condition: 4 four-

member cliques and 24 three-member cliques. There were 11

cliques in the post-economy condition: 3 five-member cliques, 1

four-member clique, and 7 three-member cliques. There were 6three-mem ber cliques formed in the pre-family cond ition and none

in the post-family condition. There were 13 cliques formed in the

pre-regular condition: 3 four-member cliqu es and 10 three-member

cliques. The re were 16 cliques formed in the post-regttiar condition:

3 four-member cliques and 13 three-member cliques.

Equivalence Substitutes

Two nodes are stmcturally equivalent if they have identical

linkages to other network nodes (cf.., Hopkins, Henderson, and

Iacobucci 1995). Table 3 has the equivalence gr oupi i^s for these

six conditions. In the pre-economy condition, 3 groups were based

on stmctural equivalence. In all other conditions (post-economy,

pre-/post-family, and pre-/post-regular), 2 groups were formed.

D I S C U S S I O N

Brand Po^ti<miag

Brand Dilution. In the economy condition, there was no

evidence of brand dilution. On the contrary, brand enhancement

occun ed for C hrysler. Perhaps individuals exposed to the economy

version of the Model X by Porsche began to consider Chryder to be

a "sportier" brand if themost prrtotypical sports car manufacturer

(Porsche) was indeed entering the low-end m arket.

In the family condition, there was significant brand dilution:

fewer associations (4) were made to Lexus post- versus pre- family

Model Xb y Porsche. Since Lexus is known more for its sedans than

its coupes, it could be that those individuals w to elidt ed it prior tothe introduction of Model X, were less inclined to do so after the

intervention. That is, there was clearly a segment of consumers

(participants) for whom "sports car" represented sporty sedans

(e.g. , ii xu s, J s ^ a r) or even SUV's (e.g. . Jeep). However, once

they were made to believe that Porsche was entering in to this more

family-oriented market, they generated fewer associations to its

Japanese rival, Lexus.

In the regular condition, J^uar suffered significant brand

dilution along with insignificant losses to Mercedes Benz and

Corvette. Perh^)s the introduction of the regular Model X, which

was touted as "everything you ever expected a Porsche to be,"

reminded consumers of what a "sports car" w as really supposed to

be . Most subjects provided Porsche as one of their more top-of-

mind (or prototypical) "sports cars," and placed Mercedes, Jaguar,and Corvette farther down the list (if at all). However, surprising



Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 29) 140 1

T A B L E 2

Cohesion Cliques of Associations

Clique

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Economy Condition

Pre

Benz Jaguar Mazda

Porsche

Benz Jaguar Mazda

classic

Benz Jaguar Corvette

Benz Jaguar less-variety

Benz Jeep Porsche

Benz Jeep classic

Benz Jeep faster

Benz European/German

faster

Benz Mazda faster

Benz faster less-variety

Benz faster sporty

Benz Porsche sporty

Ferrari Jeep faster

Ferrari Mazda faster

Ferrari faster less-variety

Ferrari faster sporty

Post

Benz Ferrari Jeep

Mazda Porsche

Benz Ferrari Jeep

Porsche MO DELX

Benz Ferrari less-variety

Benz Ferrari sedan

Benz non-Japanese

less-variety

Benz non-Japanese sedan

Jeep Lamborghini Mazda

common E uropean/

German foreign

high-price less-variety

common European/

German foreign sedan

comm on high-quality

less-variety

common high-quality

sedan

Family Con dition

Pre

Jaguar Mazda

Porsche

Jaguar Mazda

classic

Jaguar Mazda

common

Mazda common

foreign

Benz Jeep classic

faster high-price

less-variety

Post

na

na

na

na

na

na

Regular Condition

Pr e

Benz Lexus

Mazda common

Benz Mazda

common Non-

Japanese

Benz common

Non-Japanese

Benz Jeep

common

Benz Lexus

less-variety

Alfa Mazda

common

Alfa Jeepcommon

Ferrari Mazda

Japanese

Jaguar Mazda

Japanese

Lamborghini

Mazda

Non-Japanese

Lexus Mazda

common foreign

Lexus foreign

less-variety

common

non-Japanese

high-price

Post

Benz Lexus

Porsche

Benz Mazda

Porsche

Benz Jeep

Porsche

Benz Porsche

sedan

Benz

Lamboighini

less-variety

Benz

Lamborghini

sedan

Benz Mazdaless-variety

Mazda

common

less-variety

Ferrari Mazda

less-variety

Mazda com-

mon non-

Japanese less-

variety

Mazda com-

mon foreign

less-varietycotnmon high-

price less-

variety

common high-

quality less-

variety

Lexus com-

mon foreign

Lamborghini

high-price

less-variety

Lamborghini

high-price

sporty

17 Ferrari Jaguar Mazda

18 Ferrari Jagua r less-variety

19 comm on faster high-price

less-variety

20 Jeep comm on faster

21 Mazda comm on faster

22 comm on faster sporty

23 Jaguar Mazda classic common

24 Jaguar comm on less-variety

25 Jeep classic common

26 Mazda comm on foreign

27 comm on foreign less-variety28 European/German faster

high-price



40 2 / Using Network A nalysis toUnderstand Brands

T A B L E 3

Equivalence of Groups of Competitive Sub stitutes

I

s

Q

OH

u

cCO

§Z

&0

rt

1-J

SIXJ PH i

•crt

rt

u

on

O

ZI

I

"tu

J

03

wB

rt

O

Z

ecs.rt1—>

No

• crt>

Le

S

o<L>

Cv

<

I

a

o

8

SI

IJ3

Irti-j)

§N

Z

(Zl

5 I



wa s a marked inc rease , yet not significant, in the centrality of Jeepfrom the pre-regular to the post-regular condition. Perhaps sincethere were no atypical features of sports cars provided, and consum -ers ' minds were allowed to freely fioat to their perceived notions of"sports cars," Jeep w as allowed into their thinking upon repeatedrefiection.

Branded Features. Candidates for branded features would be

those attributes high on centrality—those that are important to the

brand and ca tegory. There were several changes in degree centrali-ties in the economy condition. Most notably, although not signifi-

cant, was the decre ase in low price associations. At first glance, this

might seem counter-intuitive for the economy condition. How ever,

it actually makes sense since our manipulation was for an $11,000

sports car by Porsche. Prior to the intervention, participants were

probably anchoring on much higher reference prices as being

"low." However, after being exposed to $ 11,000, they updated their

priors to refiect a new understanding of what "low" might really

me an. In addition, four attributes increased, again not significantly

so , from the pre- to post- economy conditions: "Not Japanese,"

"Variety not Sport," Two Wheel Drive Not All Terrain," and

"Sporty not Se dan." It is not clear whether any of these would be

candidates for branded features as previously suggested.

Several changes to the perception of the sports car categoryoccurred afier the introduction of the family Model X. There were

increase s in percep tions of "classy " (less classy decreased from 8 to

0) , "non -British", and "low quality." Oddly enough, but not

significant, was the increased centrality of "less variety," perhaps

due hi part to our strong intervention that listed so many features

(e.g., enlarged tmnk sp ace, built-in child seats, airbags, four-wheel

drive, luggage rac ks) that the consum er may have thought that there

were no additional options available, hence "less variety" for this

family car. Since neither the economy nor regular conditions

offered as many features, the consumer was more likely to assume

that other options were available.

Since the regular cond ition functioned like a control group, it

might appear odd to see any changes between pre- and post-intervention networks. However, there was still a new Porsche

introduced and this introduction helped to create new associations

("non-Japanese," "Variety," "Two Wheel Drive," and "sporty")

that did not exist prior to exposure to the intervention. In add ition,

some attributes that were highly central prior to the new car

introduction, lost favor in hght of the new entrant to the category:

"unique " and "slower." "Uniq ue" probably decreased in centrality

due to the insistence by our intervention that the Model X was

"everything you have come to expect from a P orsche." On the other

hand, "slower" significantly decreased because most consumers

have come to associate Porsche with speed. By adding another

typical Porsche to the set of brand n odes, there was an upda te to the

set of attributes associated with those sets of brands.

Complementarity: Co-BrandingIn this section, we present the netwo rk findings from the pre-

/ post- experimenta l design for all three brand extens ions. We beg in

by describing the brands that are cohesive (associated) and then

proceed to examine those that are equivalent (similar). The cliques

in Table 2 are based on a large dataset and thus, the results are fairiy

complex, so they are worth explaining here.

A first observation is that for the true brand extensions (economy

and family), the number of cliques decreased from pre- to post

manipulation. This finding suggests that the information in the

comm unication became the focus of the consumer perception the

marketing intervention clarified and simplified the associative

network (at least in the short-term). The number of cliques re-

mained the same in the regular (control) condition, and if anything.

Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 29) / 40 3

increased slightly, as if participants were elaborating on their own

individual thoughts when given no tmly new information.

In the pre- economy co ndition's cliques 1-4, there were four

associations between Benz and Jaguar. Mazda joins this group

twice, and Corve tte and Porsche are each activated once, indicating

peripheral brands to the core Benz-Jaguar associative link. In the

second clique are less traditional cars, while the fourth clique

suggests the perception that Benz and Jaguar are manufacturers of

a fuller line, a variety of cars, not just the sports cars beingconsidered and compared to Porsche.

We summarize these cliques, looking for the qualities theyhave in common (i.e., factoring the cliques for their common andunique associations). Cliques 1-4 identify a core set of {Benz,Jaguar, Mazda} associations. Cliques 5-7 contain Benz, Jeep,classic, and faster. Cliques 8-12 describe the Benz as fast and sportywhile cliques 13-18 associate Ferrari with fast. Cliques 20-28describe both Jeeps and Mazdas as fast sports cars with commonshapes.

After describing the economy Porsche, the clique stmcture

changed quite a bit. The Ben z-Jaguar wa s activated less frequently.

Instead, cliques 1-4 show a connection between the brands: Benz,

Ferrari, Jeep, and the regular Porsche and its new M odel X. C liques

5 and 6 classify Benz and non-Japanese together—a focus on

European makes. Similariy cliques 8 and 9 contrast European/

German with American, together with the attribute of common

shape. Finally, cliques 10 and 11 describe that common shape is

associated with perceptions of high quality.

In the pre-family condition, cliques 1-4 indicate a conne ction

between Jaguar and Mazda and the quality of common shape.

Clique 5 connects Benz and Jeep with classic, and clique 6 shows

activations among faster, high price, and less variety (a high-end

focused product line).

No cliques were found after the intervention. The family

Porsche was described with a large number of qualities that were

indeed difficult to reconcile with the status of a sports car, including

leg room, full seating capacity, tmnks, and bike racks etc., soperhaps the communication so sufficiently confused the consumer

that they had not yet had time to reconvene sensible associations.

Recall the centrality results that many changed associations were

occurring in the minds of these consumers. Evidently dyadic

associations were being formed and destroyed, but as yet, cliques

(groups of three or more nodes) had not yet firmed up . At this point,

when "sports car" was activated, it now brought along m any weird

new associations, none of which had yet been strongly assimilated

into the sports car category, hen ce yielding no cliqued associations.

For the regular Porsche con dition, cliques 1-5 showed similar-

ity to the associations in the pre- cond itions of the other cells (i.e.,

Benz and Mazda and comm on shape were a ssociated). Cliques 6

and 7 emphasize the uniqueness of the Alfa Rom eo. Cliques 8 -10

characterized the Mazda as a Japanese make , and cliques 11 and 12associate Lexus and non-American.

After consumers thought about Porsches, the cliques lookedonly somewhat different. Cliques 1-6 connected Benz to Porsche,and to a lesser extent, Lamborghini and sedans. Cliques 7-13described the Mazda as a car with common shape made by amanufacturer that produces a small variety of cars. Lastly thecliques 16 and 17 connect the Lamborghini and high price nodes.

SubstitutabUity

BrandParity/Confusion/Cannibalization. As previously me n-tioned. Table 3 contains the equivalence groupings for these sixcond itions. Where as the number of cliques usually got sma ller post-intervention, the number of stmctural equivalents increased pre- to



40 4 / Using Network Analysis to Underhand Brands

post- intervention. Th e brands and attributes that do not specifically

appear in these ch arts are those that form on e larger group, sim ilar

in structure by default by not being highly interconnected to other

network nodes.

In the pre-economy condition, M azda, Jaguar, and Jeep were

the most similar interchangeable brands. The attributes of non-

Japanese and common shape were seen as similar. Less-variety and

faster were also attributes that factored together as similar, which is

also sensible given that several auto manufacturers were included

in the network w ith specialties in sports cars.

After introdudng the inexpensive Porsche, the brands and

attributes perceived to be similar change somewhat. Mazda and

Jeep are now grouped with Ferrari. Jaguar is grouped with Chrysler.

The attributes of non-Japanese and common shape still correlate,

and now less-variety joins the cluster.Finally, sedan bodies are seen

to be similar to the quality of high price.

In the family equivalence groups, there are again similarities

among Jaguar, Benz, Mazda, and Jeep. There are also similarities

between the attributes of less-variety and common shape, and non-

Japanese and fast. After the introduction of a big, bulky family

Porsche, respondents cluster together {non-Japanese, less-variety,

sedan}, {Corvette, Mazda}, and {Chrysler, Jaguar, Ferrari}.Finally, in the pre-regular condition, again, we see some

concordance with the pre- perceptions in the other conditions:

Mazda and Jeep are similar, as are fast, non-Japanese, and less-

variety, and finally comm on shape is grouped w ith cla ssic After

simply thinking more about Porsches, Benz is grouped with rela-

tively high prices, Ma zda and Jeep retain their similarity, and Lexus

is grouped with fast and high status. Less-variety and sedan are

grouped, as well as the group of non-Japan ese and British (presum-

ably in contrast to American and European makes).

The findings on the cliques and equivalence groups were not

as simple and clear, as we would have liked. However, they

demonstrated the richness and variety of the connections that

consumers have in their minds when considering and com paring

brands.

SUMMARY

Our goal was to employ consumer associative networks for the

purpose of uncovering the brand constructs of positioning,

complementarity, and substitutability. We began by discussing the

nature of consumer brand associations—responses that are evoked

when consumers think about brands. E xisting cognitive theories of

associative stmctures were connected to existing literature on

stmctural networks for the purposes of representing consumer

brand associations.

Associative networks were compared in a pre- / post- design

during which respondents were exposed to mock advertising litera-

ture describing one of three hypothetical brand extensions. Theassociative networks draw from individual's free association re-

sponses (i.e., listing their own relevant stimu lus consideration sets)

and from tdadic comparisons that generate multiple attributes that

distinguish among the brands. Given the qualitative and idiosyn-

cratic natu re of the data collection proc edure, it is not surprising that

the resulting associative netw orks were at times fairly comp lex. Of

greater importance is the ability of networks to distinguish brands

that are associated, and therefore candidates for complementary

brand action such as co-branding, from bran ds that are similar, and

therefore substitutable competitors in the minds of the consumers.

Future Directions. Future research might include replication

across non-automotive categories and elicitation and representa-

tion using theories of other knowledge stmctures. In terms of the

former, we believe that automobiles were a product category ripewith instances of possibilities for the study of branding co nstructs.

With that being said, future research could perhaps pursue other

categories to see if they are as conducive to the study of brand

constmcts.

There are many different forms of knowledge structures that

could have been employed for the purpose of uncovering the

various branding constmcts. More traditional methods bases on

spatial representation such as MDS would be one option. It is our

belief that consumer associative networks would prove superior to

these approaches because of their tolerance of idiosyncratic re-

sponses. One of the primary differences between M DS and Con-

sumer Associative Networks is that MDS operates using researcher-

driven stimuli (brands) whereas the stimuli (brands) used in Con-

sumer Associative Networks are consumer-driven. Thus, in the

MDS example, it would have been impossible to uncover the

association that consumers made between sports cars and what we

consider to be sports utility vehicles unless the researcher had

included an SUV brand in the pairwise sim ilarities task given to the

participants. What makes the associative network approach so rich

is its ability to uncover associations such as these that would be

counter-intuitive to researchers. It would be of interest to test this

empirically. For the present, at the least, we wished to begin to

demonstrate the utility of the consumer associative networks'utility as an approach to begin to start addressing the many ques-

tions that might be asked regardingbrandingconstmc ts. W e believe

that we have begun to make progress on this venture.

REFERENCES

Aaker, David. A. and Kevin Lane Keller (1990), "Consumer

Evaluations of Brand Extensions," Journal of Marketing, 54

(January), 27-41.

Anderson, John R. and G ordon H. Bower, eds., (1973), Human

Associative Memory: A Brief Edition, Hillsdale, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Bettman, James R. (1971), "A G raph Theory Approach to

Comparing Consumer Information Processing Models,"

Management Science, 18 (4), December, 114-128.

Calder, Bobby J. and Charles L. Gm der (1989), "Emotional

Advertising Appeals," in A. Tybout and P. Cafferatta (eds.).

Advertising and Consumer Psychology, Hillsdale, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Ellis, Henry C . and R. Reed Hunt (1992), Fundamentals of

Cognitive Psychology, Fifth E dition, Dubuque, Iowa: W.C.

Brown C o. Publishers, 169-193.

Green, Paul, Yoram Wind, and Am n K. Jain (1973), "Analyzing

Free-Response Data in Marketing Research," Journal of

Marketing Research, 10 (February), 45-52.

Hauser, John R. and Frank S. Koppehnan (1979), "A ltemative

Perceptual Mapping Techniques: Relative Accuracy and

Usefulness," Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (Novem-ber), 495-506.

Henderson, Geraldine R., Dawn Iacobucci, and Bobby J. Caider

(1998), "Brand Diagnostics: Mapping Branding Effect Using

Consumer Associative Networks," European Journal of

Operational Research, 111, 306-327.

Hopkins, Nigel, Geraldine R Henderson and Dawn Iacobucci

(1995), "Actor Equivalence in Networks: The B usiness Ties

That Bind," Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 2, 3-

31 .

Iacobucci, Dawn and Nigel Hopkins (1992), "Modeling D yadic

Interactions and Netw orks in Marketing," Journal of

Marketing Research, 29, Febmary, 5-17.

Kapferer, Jean-NogI (1995), "Brand Confusion: Empirical Study

of a Legal Concept," Psychology and Marketing, 12 (6), 551-568.



Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 29) 1405

Keller, Kevin Lane (1993), "Conceptualizing, Measuring, and

Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity," Jourrml of

Marketing, January, 1-22.

Kelly, George A. (1955), The Psychology of Personal Con-

structs, Volumes 1 and 2, New York: Academic Press.

Knoke, David and Jam es H. Kuklinski (1982), Network Analysis,

Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication, Inc.

Krishnan, H.S. (1996), "Characteristics of Mem ory Associa-

tions: A Consum er-Based B rand Equity Perspective,"InternatiorMl Journal of Research in Marketing, 13 (Octo-

ber), 389-405.

Loken, Barbara and Deborah R. John (1993), "Diluting Brand

Beliefs: When Do B rand Extensions Have a Negative

Impact?" Journal of Marketing, July, 71-84.

Olson, Jerry C. and A . Muderrisoglu (1977), "The Stability of

Responses O btained by Free Elicitation: Implications for

Measuring Attribute Salience and Memory Stmcture," in

Advances in Consumer Research, 6, ed. W. L. Wilkie, 269-

275.

Reynolds, Thoma s J. and Jonathan Gutman (1988), "Laddering

Theory, Me thod, Analysis, and Interpretation," Journal of

Advertising Research, Febmary/March, 11-31.

Sampson, Peter (1972), "Using the Repertory Grid Test,"

Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 78-81.

Schmitt, Bem d H ., Nader T. Tavassoli, and Robert T. Millard

(1993), "Memory for Print Ads: Understanding R elations

Among Brand Name, Copy, and Picture," Journal of

Consumer Psychology, 2 (1), 55-81.

Sirsi, Ajay K., James C. W ard, and Peter H. Reingen (1996),

"Microcultural Analysis of Variation in Sharing of Causal

Reasoning about Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research,

22 , 345-372.

Zaltman, Gerald and Robin H. Coulter (1995), "Seeing the Voice

of the Customer: Metaphor-Based Advertising Resea rch,"

Journal of Advertising R esearch, July/August, 35-51.

repertory grid for brands

Documents